With the advent of the Vidarbha Judgment, a swift change occurred in giving excessive power to the Adjudicating Authority. This discretionary power would lead to unnecessary judicial intervention even after default. Several financial creditors will face unjust harm considering that even after multiple efforts are put in to recover the long-due debt, preference would still be given to the background situation of the Corporate Debtor. This article will highlight the empirical data and analysis of how an amendment is required in IBC due to the impossibility of undoing the harm caused by this judicial precedent.
Author wise: Jahnvi Pandey
Corporate Insolvency Vs. Recovery Proceedings by SEBI – By Jahnvi Pandey
As per the settled position of law, legal proceedings cannot continue during the moratorium. However, the above question came before the NCLT, Mumbai, in the case of Mr. Nitin Suresh Satghare and 99 Ors. v. Pancard Clubs Limited. This article aims to answer the above question and analyze the decision of NCLT Mumbai in this case through different deliberations.