04/07/2019

Standard Chartered Bank Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta, R.P. of Essar Steel Ltd. & Ors.

If both Section 5(7) and Section 5(8) are read together, it is evident that there is no distinction made between one or other ‘Financial Creditor’. All persons to whom a financial debt is owed by the ‘Corporate Debtor’, which debt is disbursed against the consideration for time value of money, whether they come within one or other clause of Section 5(8), all of such person form one class i.e. ‘Financial Creditor’ they cannot be sub-classified as ‘Secured’ or ‘Unsecured Financial Creditor’ for the purpose of preparation of the ‘Resolution Plan’ by the ‘Resolution Applicant’. we hold that the ‘Financial Creditors’ cannot be discriminated on the ground of ‘Secured’ or ‘Unsecured Financial Creditors’ for the purpose of distribution of proposed amount amongst stakeholders in the ‘Resolution Plan’ by the ‘Resolution Applicant’.

Standard Chartered Bank Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta, R.P. of Essar Steel Ltd. & Ors. Read Post »

If Corporate Debtor is a MSME, it is not necessary for the CoC to follow all the procedures under the CIRP- Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Bafna Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors.-NCLAT

Further, NCLAT held that in exceptional circumstances, if the Corporate Debtor is MSME, it is not necessary for the Promoters to compete with other Resolution Applicants to regain the control of the Corporate Debtor. Further held that it is open to the CoC to defer the process of issuance of Information Memorandum, if the Promoter of MSME offers a viable and feasible plan maximising the assets of the Corporate Debtor and balancing all the stakeholders. For such purpose, it is not required to follow all the procedure as the case for accepting the proposal under Section 12A of the Code.

If Corporate Debtor is a MSME, it is not necessary for the CoC to follow all the procedures under the CIRP- Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Bafna Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors.-NCLAT Read Post »

Scroll to Top