15/02/2022

An Interim Resolution Professional who is appointed in respect of the Corporate Debtor cannot act as an Insolvency Professional in respect of the Personal Guarantor of the concerned Corporate Debtor – S.A Premkumar & Anr. – NCLT Chennai Bench

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

An Interim Resolution Professional who is appointed in respect of the Corporate Debtor cannot act as an Insolvency Professional in respect of the Personal Guarantor of the concerned Corporate Debtor – S.A Premkumar & Anr. – NCLT Chennai Bench Read Post »

Concept of Going Concern Sale under IBC to Sale of “Corporate Debtor as a going concern” under Regulation 32(e) and sale of “Business of Corporate Debtor as a going concern” under Regulation 32(f) – M.S. Viswanathan Vs. Pixtronic Global Technologies Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chennai Bench

There are two going concern sales defined under Regulation 32 of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016. The first one pertains to Sale of “Corporate Debtor as a going concern” under Regulation 32(e) and sale of “Business of Corporate Debtor as a going concern” under Regulation 32(f).

Concept of Going Concern Sale under IBC to Sale of “Corporate Debtor as a going concern” under Regulation 32(e) and sale of “Business of Corporate Debtor as a going concern” under Regulation 32(f) – M.S. Viswanathan Vs. Pixtronic Global Technologies Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chennai Bench Read Post »

Operational Creditors cannot claim that he should be given equivalent amount to one which has been given to the Financial Creditors – Jaybee Lamination Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Trans-Fab Power India Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT holds that it has been settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited vs. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors. [2019] ibclaw.in 07 SC, that there cannot be equality in two different categories of claimants. The Appellant cannot claim that he should be given equivalent amount to one which has been given to the Financial Creditors. Both Operational Creditors and Financial Creditors fall in different categories and they can only claim equality with the same group or class. The law has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that no equal treatment can be claimed in between the different classes as far as payment is concerned.

Operational Creditors cannot claim that he should be given equivalent amount to one which has been given to the Financial Creditors – Jaybee Lamination Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Trans-Fab Power India Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Allocation made to the Operational Creditor under the Resolution Plan is the matter of commercial wisdom of the CoC – Devsaria Iron and Steel Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. RP of Perfect Boring Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT holds that the order impugned is the order by which Resolution Plan has been approved. The allocation made to the Operational Creditor under the Resolution Plan is the matter of commercial wisdom of the CoC and CoC having approved the Resolution Plan with 96.37% vote share, we see no reason to take any other view. In exercise of our jurisdiction under Section 61, the amount allocated to the Operational Creditor could not be changed

Allocation made to the Operational Creditor under the Resolution Plan is the matter of commercial wisdom of the CoC – Devsaria Iron and Steel Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. RP of Perfect Boring Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top