0 comments on “Whether a trade union could be said to be an operational creditor for the purpose of the IBC-JK Jute Mill Mazdoor Morcha Vs. Juggilal Kamlapat Jute Mills Company Ltd. Through Its Director & Ors.- SC”

Whether a trade union could be said to be an operational creditor for the purpose of the IBC-JK Jute Mill Mazdoor Morcha Vs. Juggilal Kamlapat Jute Mills Company Ltd. Through Its Director & Ors.- SC

The NCLAT, by the impugned judgment, is not correct in refusing to go into whether the trade union would come within the definition of “person” under Section 3(23) of the Code. Equally, the NCLAT is not correct in stating that a trade union would not be an operational creditor as no services are rendered by the trade union to the corporate debtor. What is clear is that the trade union represents its members who are workers, to whom dues may be owed by the employer, which are certainly debts owed for services rendered by each individual workman, who are collectively represented by the trade union. Equally, to state that for each workman there will be a separate cause of action, a separate claim, and a separate date of default would ignore the fact that a joint petition could be filed under Rule 6 read with Form 5 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016, with authority from several workmen to one of them to file such petition on behalf of all. For all these reasons, we allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the NCLAT. The matter is now remanded to the NCLAT who will decide the appeal on merits expeditiously as this matter has been pending for quite some time.

0 comments on “Constitutional validity of the impugned circular issued by the RBI-Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. UOI & Ors.- SC”

Constitutional validity of the impugned circular issued by the RBI-Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. UOI & Ors.- SC

Case Reference Case Name : Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Union Of India & Ors. Appeal : Transferred Case (Civil) No.66 of 2018 In Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1399 of 2018 Appellant(s) : Dharani Sugars And Chemicals Ltd. Respondent(s) :…

0 comments on “The right of the appellant to be heard, audi alteram partem- Jai Balaji Industries Limited Vs. SBI & Ors.-Supreme Court”

The right of the appellant to be heard, audi alteram partem- Jai Balaji Industries Limited Vs. SBI & Ors.-Supreme Court

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the instant appeal can be disposed of by setting aside the order of NCLAT and remanding the matter back to the NCLAT for fresh consideration. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 08.02.2019 passed by the NCLAT and remand the matter back to NCLAT with a direction to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

0 comments on “Supreme Court in the matter of Ved Prakash Vadera & Ors. Vs. IREO Five River Private Ltd.”

Supreme Court in the matter of Ved Prakash Vadera & Ors. Vs. IREO Five River Private Ltd.

Case Reference Case Name : Ved Prakash Vadera & Ors. Vs. IREO Five River Private Ltd. Appeal : Civil Appeal No.12204 Of 2018 Appellant(s) : Ved Prakash Vadera & Ors. Respondent(s) : IREO Five River Private Ltd. Date of Judgment…

0 comments on “Sec. 434(1)(b) is attracted only if execution or other process is issued in respect of an order of a Tribunal in favour of a creditor of the company is returned unsatisfied in whole or in part- Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd-Supreme Court”

Sec. 434(1)(b) is attracted only if execution or other process is issued in respect of an order of a Tribunal in favour of a creditor of the company is returned unsatisfied in whole or in part- Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd-Supreme Court

It is obvious that Section 434(1)(b) is attracted only if execution or other process is issued in respect of an order of a Tribunal in favour of a creditor of the company is returned unsatisfied in whole or in part. This is only one of three instances in which a company shall be deemed to be unable to pay its debts. If the fact situation fits sub-clause (b) of Section 434(1), then a company may be said to be deemed to be unable to pay its debts. However, this does not mean that each one of the sub-clauses of Section 434(1) are mutually exclusive in the sense that once Section 434(1)(b) applies, Section 434(1)(a) ceases to be applicable.

0 comments on “No provision has been envisaged by the legislature to empower the RP, the NCLT or NCLAT, to reverse the commercial decision of the CoC-K. Sashidhar Vs. Indian Overseas Bank & Ors.-Supreme Court”

No provision has been envisaged by the legislature to empower the RP, the NCLT or NCLAT, to reverse the commercial decision of the CoC-K. Sashidhar Vs. Indian Overseas Bank & Ors.-Supreme Court

The scope of enquiry and the grounds on which the decision of “approval” of the resolution plan by the CoC can be interfered with by the adjudicating authority (NCLT), has been set out in Section 31(1) read with Section 30(2) and by the appellate tribunal (NCLAT) under Section 32 read with Section 61(3) of the I&B Code. No corresponding provision has been envisaged by the legislature to empower the resolution professional, the adjudicating authority (NCLT) or for that matter the appellate authority (NCLAT), to reverse the “commercial decision” of the CoC muchless of the dissenting financial creditors for not supporting the proposed resolution plan.

0 comments on “Director in CoC-Vijay Kumar Jain Vs. Standard Chartered Bank & Ors.-Supreme Court”

Director in CoC-Vijay Kumar Jain Vs. Standard Chartered Bank & Ors.-Supreme Court

The proviso to Section 21(2) clarifies that a director who is also a financial creditor who is a related party of the corporate debtor shall not have any right of representation, participation, or voting in a meeting of the committee of creditors. Directors, simplicitor, are not the subject matter of the proviso to Section 21(2), but only directors who are related parties of the corporate debtor