209

If a Resolution Professional has already been appointed in Insolvency of Personal Guarantor, there is no occasion to appoint another Resolution Professional in other application – Mohit Arora Vs. IFCI Ltd. and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to […]

If a Resolution Professional has already been appointed in Insolvency of Personal Guarantor, there is no occasion to appoint another Resolution Professional in other application – Mohit Arora Vs. IFCI Ltd. and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

MSME Act is not applicable for the purpose of determining the claim made under the Code even if the creditor is an MSME – Geostar Surveys India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dipti Mehta IRP of Great Unison Contractors India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

Hon’ble NCLT Mumbai Bench held that as regards the interest claimed, we notice that there is no agreement between the Applicant and the Corporate Debtor for payment of interest, and the MSME Act is not applicable for the purpose of determining the claim made under the Code even if the creditor is an MSME.

MSME Act is not applicable for the purpose of determining the claim made under the Code even if the creditor is an MSME – Geostar Surveys India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dipti Mehta IRP of Great Unison Contractors India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

A Resolution Professional will come within the meaning of ‘Public Servant’ under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 233 of IBC does not protect where he has been apprehended red-handed with the bribe amount – Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Bureau, Dhanbad – Jharkhand High Court

In this case, a complaint against Resolution Professional was made that Resolution Professional/Petitioner had demanded a bribe of Rs.2,00,000/- per month for showing leniency in the insolvency resolution process for extending CIRP process from 09 months to 02 years and also demanded Rs.20,00,000/- for obtaining favourable forensic audit/valuation report from his chosen Forensic Auditor/Valuer and for helping in re-possession of plant/company.
The central question in the instant petition is whether Resolution Professional as defined under Section 22 of the IBC will come within the meaning of ‘Public Servant’ under Section 2 (c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988?.

Hon’ble High Court that: (i) functions and obligations of Insolvency Professionals are as set out under Section 208 of IBC which are public in nature. These functions intimately relate to matters relating to loans extended by the Banks which is investments from public at large and therefore will come within the meaning of public duty as provided under Section 2-c(viii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. (ii) The appointment of Resolution Professional is made during the resolution process before the Company Law Tribunal with its approval, he will be a public servant under Section 2(c)(v) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. (iii) Section 233 of IBC gives protection to a resolution professional from criminal prosecution for acts in good faith, and not where he has been apprehended red-handed with the bribe amount. (iv) Section 232 does not exclude operation of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

A Resolution Professional will come within the meaning of ‘Public Servant’ under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 233 of IBC does not protect where he has been apprehended red-handed with the bribe amount – Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Bureau, Dhanbad – Jharkhand High Court Read Post »

Discounting of invoice/receivables, Financial Debt or Operational Debt under IBC – Minions Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. TDT Copper Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

The Agreement (COR) was entered into between the Seller, Financier and the Corporate Debtor (As customer). As per the agreement, the Seller had agreed for discounting of invoice of the customer (CD) for the creation of the right and interest in the invoice receivables in favour of the Financier (Appellant). Upon execution of agreement of COR, the Appellant as a Financier discounted the invoice and deposited the amounts into an escrow/nodal account maintained by KredX with an escrow/nodal agent, namely, Yes Bank Limited who further transferred the said amount to the account of the Seller and on receiving, the Seller transferred its right to receive the money under the invoices in favour of the Financiers/Appellants.

Discounting of invoice/receivables, Financial Debt or Operational Debt under IBC – Minions Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. TDT Copper Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Issue of Lease of immovable property under IBC is referred for constitution of a Larger Bench – Jaipur Trade Expocentre Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Metro Jet Airways Training Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

Issue of whether claim of the Licensor for payment of License Fee for use and occupation of Immovable Premises for commercial purposes is a claim of Operational Debt within the meaning of Section 5(21) of the Code. NCLAT holds that we have our doubts over the opinion by this Tribunal in “Mr. M. Ravindranath Reddy Vs. Mr. G. Kishan & Ors.”. The Report of the Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee as quoted with approval by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Mobilox Innovative (Supra) has not been placed before the Bench deciding “Mr. M. Ravindranath Reddy Vs. Mr. G. Kishan & Ors.” case.

Issue of Lease of immovable property under IBC is referred for constitution of a Larger Bench – Jaipur Trade Expocentre Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Metro Jet Airways Training Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

What is the true meaning and purport of the expression “entertain” in Section 9(3) of the Arbitration Act – Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. Vs. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. – Supreme Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

What is the true meaning and purport of the expression “entertain” in Section 9(3) of the Arbitration Act – Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. Vs. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top