The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 empowers Financial Creditor, Operational Creditors, and Corporate Debtor to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) upon a default being committed by a Corporate Debtor. CIRP involves the setting up of a Committee of Creditors (CoC) and approval of a resolution plan to restructure the Corporate Debtor, or the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. Often, Creditors and Corporate Debtor prefer to reach amicable settlements instead of going through with the entire CIRP process.

The Economic Survey prepared by the Economic Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India is an annual performance report of the Country’s economy which focuses on the economic developments in the country of each and every sector and helps in better utilization of resources and their allocation in the Union Budget. The Economic Survey is presented before the Budget and the theme of Economic Survey 2021-22, relates to the art and science of policymaking under conditions of extreme uncertainty.

INTRODUCTION

The Apex Court on May 21,2021 in Lalit Kumar Jain V. Union of India &Ors[1] recognized and upheld the Rules on Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) 2019, as notified by the Central Government on November 15, 2019.

The question whether the institution or continuation of a proceeding under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act  can be said to be covered by the moratorium provision, namely, Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) has been a crucial issue in the legal domain. Various High courts have had dissenting opinion in relation to this concerning matter. However the Apex court has now put an end to all doubts and confusions.

Law of Limitation prescribes the time limit for different types of suits for which an aggrieved person can approach the court for redressal. For Insolvency applications, the limitation period is 3 years.

When the Corporate Debtor defaults in making payments to its creditors the process of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) can be initiated against it by its creditors. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereafter “the Code”) provides the process for insolvency resolution process (IRP). For this purpose the government also enacted the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 and  Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 (hereafter “the Rules”).

In India, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (hereinafter referred to as ‘CIRP’) is governed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Code’). Insolvency laws in India provides for an expeditious settlement of insolvency cases, protecting the interests of the creditors through a balanced procedure, in a time bound manner. A financial creditor, an operational creditor and the corporate debtor are eligible to initiate the CIRP.

In a recent case Sagufa Ahmed & ors. V. Upper Assam Plywood Products Pvt. Ltd. & ors.^[1], the Three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice S.A.

State Bank of India v. M/s. Metenere Limited^[1]

In a recent case, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ("NCLAT"), vide its ruling dated May 22, 2020 upheld the order passed by respective National Company Law Tribunal ("NCLT") dated January 4, 2020 with respect to substitution of appointment of an ex-employee of the Financial Creditor as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).

Factual Background

Introduction