250

Para 2.1 “Amount realized” and Para 2.5 “Period for calculation of fee” of IBBI Circular dated 28.09.2023 are struck down as being ultra vires the Liquidation Process Regulations and the IBC | Para 2.2 “other liquidation cost”, Para 2.3 “Amount distributed to stakeholders” and Para 2.4 “Amount of Realisation/Distribution” are upheld – Amit Gupta Vs. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India and Anr. – Bombay High Court

In this landmark judgment, a division bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay interpreted all five paras of the IBBI Circular issued on 28.09.2023.

The Hon’ble Bench also held that the very issuance of a show cause notice has the effect of stopping the IP from taking up new work by reason of Bye-Law 23A in the Model Bye-Laws that are statutorily specified in the Schedule. The Court takes judicial notice of the serious repercussions on IPs when the IBBI issues a show cause notice. The moment disciplinary proceedings are initiated, the IP’s authorisation to conduct his assignments stands suspended. Such a position enabled by subordinate law can have serious implications for IPs. This position may also have the effect making the IBBI reticent to issue show cause notices, considering the debilitating impact it can have on any IP. This situation deserves to be reviewed by the IBBI.

Para 2.1 “Amount realized” and Para 2.5 “Period for calculation of fee” of IBBI Circular dated 28.09.2023 are struck down as being ultra vires the Liquidation Process Regulations and the IBC | Para 2.2 “other liquidation cost”, Para 2.3 “Amount distributed to stakeholders” and Para 2.4 “Amount of Realisation/Distribution” are upheld – Amit Gupta Vs. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India and Anr. – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Going Concern Sale under IBC and advantages of selling the Corporate Debtor ‘as a going concern’ – Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Liquidator Shamken Spinners Ltd. Vs. Sujeet Motors (P) Ltd. – NCLT Allahabad Bench

In this judgment, the Adjudicating Authority highlighted provisions of sale as a going concern, its advantage and other relevant points.

Going Concern Sale under IBC and advantages of selling the Corporate Debtor ‘as a going concern’ – Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Liquidator Shamken Spinners Ltd. Vs. Sujeet Motors (P) Ltd. – NCLT Allahabad Bench Read Post »

Any settlement after constitution of CoC is only permissible when the same is approved with 90% vote share of CoC – Rajendra Pandurang Barde Vs. Amit Steels – NCLAT New Delhi

In this case, Operational Creditor proceeded with the Application even after 07.12.2022, which indicates that Operational Creditor was not fully satisfied with the settlement, if any reached. Even according to the Appellant’s case, full payment under the said settlement was never made before admission of Section 9 Application. The Corporate Debtor does not appear before the Adjudicating Authority, nor raised any defense and the debt and default is proved as held by the Adjudicating Authority, no error was committed by the Adjudicating Authority in admitting Section 9 Application.

Any settlement after constitution of CoC is only permissible when the same is approved with 90% vote share of CoC – Rajendra Pandurang Barde Vs. Amit Steels – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top