A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India (SC) in V. Nagarajan v. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. & Others (judgment dated 22 October 2021 in Civil Appeal No. 3327 of 2020) dismissed an appeal against an order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) which had dismissed an appeal against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal Chennai (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) as barred by limitation.
Facts
Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. Supreme Court: Once the resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors and submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, a successful resolution applicant cannot withdraw or modify the resolution plan The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has held in its judgment dated September 13, 2021, in the matter of Ebix Singapore Private Limited v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another (Civil Appeal No.
Introduction:
Aggrieved by the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) refusing to condone a delay of 44 (forty-four) days in filing an appeal against the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the Appellant (i.e., National Spot Exchange Limited) preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
The article provides a summary of the Judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Indian in Indus Biotech Private limited v. Kotak India venture fund .2 wherein the court has discussed that whether an Application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 be maintainable if a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is pending ?
FACTS OF THE CASE :
INTRODUCTION
Supreme Court: Interest free term loans advanced to a corporate person are not excluded from the purview of a financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. II. Bombay High Court: A secured debt shall take priority over the ‘Government’ dues/tax dues under the SARFAESI Act. III. NCLAT: Rejects application filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on grounds of collusion between the corporate debtor and the financial creditor. IV.
This newsletter covers key updates about developments in the Insolvency Law during the month of July 2021.
We have summarized the key judgments passed by the Supreme Court of India (SC), National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and the National Company Law Tribunals (NCLT). Please see below the summary of the relevant regulatory developments.
1) DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY OPERATIONAL CREDITOR BASED ON INVOICES CAN BE ISSUED IN FORM-3 INSTEAD OF FORM-4.
The Supreme Court of India (SC) in Orator Marketing Private Limited v Samtex Desinz Private Limited, Civil Appeal No. 2231 of 2021, judgment dated 26th July 2021 has held that an interest free term loan constitutes a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
The IBC provides that a financial debt is “a debt along with interest, if any, which is disbursed against the consideration for the time value of money” furthered by an inclusive list of examples that may be considered as a financial debt.
The Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2017 (‘Code’) was,inter alia, enacted for the resolution or liquidation of companies defaulting on their debts. These debts may include claims subject to an arbitration or sums determined in the form of an award. In the present article, we identify some potential scenarios where parties to an arbitration agreement must be conscious of the interplay between arbitration and the Code.
1.Initiating Insolvency Proceedings for contractual defaults
I. Supreme Court: Entries made in balance sheet amount to acknowledgement of debt for the purpose of extending limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has in its judgment dated April 15, 2021 (“Judgement”), in the matter of Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v. Bishal Jaiswal & Another [Civil Appeal No.323/2021], held that entries in balance sheets amount to acknowledgement of debt for the purpose of extending limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (“1963 Act”).