Status of Asset Reconstruction Companies(ARCs) under IBC – By Divyanshu Kumar

While the SARFAESI Act focuses on 'recovery' and is more of a 'class' remedy, the IBC focuses on 'resolution' and seeks to establish a procedure based on cooperation of the stakeholders. Since a similarity exists in the participants in both of these regulations, the possibility of overlap persists. In this article, we shall assess the various judicial and legislative developments that confirm the status that ARCs have under IBC.

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.

Revisiting the Discretionary Admittance of Applications under Section 7 of the IBC – By Arnav Doshi and Vidhi Basrani

In view of the controversial Vidarbha Industries decision, it is argued that the discretionary nature of Section 7 of the Code must be revisited. The legislative intent congealed in the initiation of CIRP by a financial debtor coupled with the jurisprudential wisdom prior to Vidarbha Industries postulates a case for the mandatory admittance of a Section 7 application. Further, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs inviting public comments on various amendments/changes to be considered to the Code is an opportunity that presents itself to reconsider the position laid in Vidarbha Industries and provide beneficial insulation to financial creditors.

Cross-Border Insolvency in India – By Aditi Avashia

A situation pertaining to cross-border insolvency occurs when an insolvent debtor has creditors or assets in various jurisdictions or when simultaneous insolvency proceedings are initiated in more than one jurisdiction. Majorly, the concept focuses on insolvency proceedings beyond the scope of domestic jurisdiction. Cross-border insolvency entails the following aspects:  i) where the insolvent debtor is the subject of insolvency proceedings in one or more jurisdictions simultaneously; ii) where the insolvent debtor has branches or assets in multiple jurisdictions, including one where the insolvency proceedings are pending; and  iii) where foreign creditors have claims or rights on the insolvent debtor’s assets in another jurisdiction where insolvency proceedings are pending.

The stamp duty payable during assignation of debt by Asset Reconstruction Companies – By Adv. Haaris Moosa

In Phoenix Arc Private Limited, Mumbai Vs. M/S. Cherupushpam Films Pvt Limited, Ernakulam (2023) 48 NCLT (hereafter Phoenix ARC) the question raised before the NCLT, Kochi Bench was whether stamp duty has to be paid on a deed assigning debt to an Asset Reconstruction Company (ARC).  The NCLT Kochi Bench has held that the ARC is bound to pay the appropriate stamp duty as per the relevant state legislation, in this case the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 (KSA, 1959

Implications of PUFE Transactions on Independent Directors under IBC – By CA. D Arvind, Insolvency Professional

Implications of PUFE Transactions under IBC on Independent Directors  Authored by:CA. D Arvind, Insolvency Professional The principal object of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is to keep the corporate as a going concern and in case of an insolvency the rescue…