Privilege Industries Ltd.

Section 3(31) of IBC does not refer to any registration of charge under Section 77 of the Companies Act, 2013 – Unity Small Finance Bank Ltd. Vs. Sripatham Venkatasubramanian Ramkumar RP for Privilege Industries Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT held that it is true that Section 3(31) does not refer to any registration of charge under Section 77. I n Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Raman Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (2023) ibclaw.in 81 SC, Hon’ble Supreme Court did not consider it appropriate to rule on the submissions of the Liquidator, vis-à-vis the fact of non-registration of charges under Section 77 of the Companies Act. The question was thus left open.

Section 3(31) of IBC does not refer to any registration of charge under Section 77 of the Companies Act, 2013 – Unity Small Finance Bank Ltd. Vs. Sripatham Venkatasubramanian Ramkumar RP for Privilege Industries Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

The timelines as stipulated in the IBC need to be considered as of Directory nature and not as Mandatory in nature – Vikram Laxman Pawar Vs. Mr. Sripatham Venkatasubramaniam Ramkumar, RP of Privilege Industries Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT held that it may also be worth considering that although the timeline as stipulated in the Code are sacrosanct and important and sometime critical for resolution of the Corporate Debtor in order to achieve the maximization of value of all the stakeholders, the timelines need to be considered as of directory nature and not as mandatory in nature.

The timelines as stipulated in the IBC need to be considered as of Directory nature and not as Mandatory in nature – Vikram Laxman Pawar Vs. Mr. Sripatham Venkatasubramaniam Ramkumar, RP of Privilege Industries Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

As per Section 10A, no IBC proceedings can be initiated against a Corporate Debtor for the default which has occurred between the period from 25/03/2020 till 24/03/2021 – Yes Bank Ltd. Vs. Privilege Industries Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

The Adjudicating Authority held that because of insertion of Sec 10A in IBC as mentioned above, this case is clearly attracted by the provisions of Sec 10A as the date of default in this case is 01/10/2020. As per Sec 10A, no IBC proceedings can be initiated against the Corporate Debtor for the default which has occurred between the period from 25/03/2020 till 24/03/2021, keeping in view of the extended period of Sec 10A, the application filed by the Operational Creditor against the Corporate Debtor cannot succeed and is hereby dismissed with a liberty granted to the Operational Creditor to pursue his case before the appropriate forum.

As per Section 10A, no IBC proceedings can be initiated against a Corporate Debtor for the default which has occurred between the period from 25/03/2020 till 24/03/2021 – Yes Bank Ltd. Vs. Privilege Industries Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Scroll to Top