14/12/2021

Issuance of Demand Notice u/s 8 of IBC after receipt of a summon of civil suit filed by Corporate Debtor against the Operational Creditor, there is a pre-existing dispute between the parties – Jotun India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Orvis Paints India Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chennai Bench

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

Issuance of Demand Notice u/s 8 of IBC after receipt of a summon of civil suit filed by Corporate Debtor against the Operational Creditor, there is a pre-existing dispute between the parties – Jotun India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Orvis Paints India Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chennai Bench Read Post »

J N Arora Trading Company Vs. Ashok Kriplani, RP of Nibula Print and Pack Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

The Appellant filed his claim much after the approval of the Resolution Plan. The Resolution Professional refused to accept the claim of the Appellant. Appellant filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority, which has been rejected. The Appellant submits that with regard to certain Government claims Resolution Professional himself has requested to AA to accept belatedly.
NCLAT dismissed the appeal holding that with regard to Government claims there is different obligation of the Resolution Professional and to fulfil the said obligation in event he has made request to the AA, we see that no parity can be claimed by the Appellant with regard to such an order.

J N Arora Trading Company Vs. Ashok Kriplani, RP of Nibula Print and Pack Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Adjudicating Authority must either admit or reject an application filed u/s 7 of IBC, it cannot compel a party to the proceedings before it to settle a dispute – E S Krishnamurthy & Ors. Vs. M/s Bharath Hi Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd. – Supreme Court

Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside judgment of NCAT and NCLT and held that the Adjudicating Authority must either admit the application under Section 7(5)(a) or it must reject the application under Section 7(5)(b). The statute does not provide for the Adjudicating Authority to undertake any other action, but for the two choices available. The Adjudicating Authority is empowered only to verify whether a default has occurred or if a default has not occurred. Based upon its decision, the Adjudicating Authority must then either admit or reject an application respectively. These are the only two courses of action which are open to the Adjudicating Authority in accordance with Section 7(5). The Adjudicating Authority cannot compel a party to the proceedings before it to settle a dispute. What the Adjudicating Authority and Appellate Authority, however, have proceeded to do in the present case is to abdicate their jurisdiction to decide a petition under Section 7 by directing the respondent to settle the remaining claims within three months and leaving it open to the original petitioners, who are aggrieved by the settlement process, to move fresh proceedings in accordance with law. Such a course of action is not contemplated by the IBC. Thus, while the Adjudicating Authority and Appellate Authority can encourage settlements, they cannot direct them by acting as courts of equity.

Adjudicating Authority must either admit or reject an application filed u/s 7 of IBC, it cannot compel a party to the proceedings before it to settle a dispute – E S Krishnamurthy & Ors. Vs. M/s Bharath Hi Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top