Search using Case Name, Appeal No., Judgment Date:

IBC Case Laws Search

[Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 & Companies Act, 2013 Case Laws]

You can cite Case Citation in your submission, Check here our Case Citation are allowed in NCLT and NCLAT judgments.

  • Subject [IBC]

  • Subject[Personal Guarantor]

  • Sections [Type 'CA-' for Companies Act Section#]

  • Regulation Wise^

  • Court/Tribunal/Bench

  • Filter Important/landmark Cases

  • Select Corporate Debtor

  • Select Applicant

  • Subject-Companies Act Case Laws$

  • Month

  • Year

  • Result per page

  • Sort Results

 

Instructions:

  • To search using Keywords, Case Name, Appeal No., Order/Judgment Date, click here.
  • To search using Case Citation, click here.
  • Preference of Search: 1st Subjects, 2nd Sections and 3rd Regulations.
  • #IBC sections in normal digit and Companies Act Section start with  ‘CA-‘.
  • ^Acronyms for Regulations Search:

    • FSP Rules: Financial Service Providers Rules
    • AAA Rules: Application to Adjudicating Authority Rules, 2016
    • IU: Information Utility Regulation
    • IP: Insolvency Professional Regulations, 2016
    • IRPPG: Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors Regulation
    • Liqu: Liquidation Process Regulations
    • PPIRP: Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process Regulations, 2021
    • VLiqu: Voluntary Liquidation Process Regulations
  • $Currently, Compromise, Arrangement and Winding-up case laws only.
  • Click here for list of landmark judgments of Supreme Court(subject wise)

Other:

  • *There are five categories for CIRP case laws in Subject Functions:
    • CIRP-I: Initiation of CIRP, Common issues etc.
    • CIRP-II: IRP/RP Appointment, Moratorium, Public Announcement, Claim etc.
    • CIRP-III: CoC constitution, meetings, voting etc.
    • CIRP-IV: Conduct CIRP, Time Limit, Co-Operation, Affairs, assets, bank guarantee etc.
    • CIRP-V: EOI, Memorandum, Resolution Plan, After Resolution Plan issues etc.
  • Separate subjects parameters for Liquidation and  PUFE(Preferential, Undervalued, Fraudulent, Extortionate] Transactions.
  • More precious results: Select Subject or Section>Select Tribunal/Court. (work in AND mode)
  • Only for Important judgments: Select Subject or Section>Select Forum wise. (work in AND mode)
NCLAT-New Delhi

An advocate can, on behalf of Company issue a demand notice under Section 8 of IBC and no such document is required to establish his period of association with the said Company & Even if there is a debt and default, the Adjudicating Authority should use its discretion in admitting/ rejecting an Application- M/s Agarwal Veneers Vs. Fundtonic Service Pvt. Ltd. - NCLAT New Delhi

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 581 NCLAT
Case Name:
M/s Agarwal Veneers Vs. Fundtonic Service Pvt. Ltd.
Order Date:
05/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-968/2020-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Fundtonic Service Pvt. Ltd.
Subjects:
CIRP-I Initiation-IBC not Debt Recovery Forum/Summary in Nature
;
CIRP-I Initiation-OC-Demand Notice [Sec. 8]
;
CIRP-I Initiation-OC-Initiation by Operational Creditors [Sec. 8 & 9]
Section:
9
;
9(5)
NCLAT held that we are of the considered view that as far as this issued is concerned, an advocate can, on behalf of the Company issue a demand notice under Section 8 and no such document is required to establish his ‘period of association’ with the said Company. It also held that the Hon’ble Supreme court in Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. vs. Axis Bank Ltd. (2022) ibclaw.in 91 SC has observed that even if there is a debt and default, the Adjudicating Authority should use its discretion in admitting/ rejecting an Application. In the instant case, the Adjudicating Authority has rightly rejected the Application on this ground too.
NCLAT-Chennai

Fees payable to a Liquidator will become payable only upon occurrence of the events of respective receipts and disbursals at specified rates payable and not otherwise - Mr. Dhiren Shantilal Shah Liquidator of Meka Dredging Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Amma Lines Pvt. Ltd. - NCLAT Chennai

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 572 NCLAT
Case Name:
Mr. Dhiren Shantilal Shah Liquidator of Meka Dredging Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Amma Lines Pvt. Ltd.
Order Date:
02/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-792/2020-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Meka Dredging Company Pvt. Ltd.
Subjects:
C&A-Compromise or Arrangement(Case Laws under IBC)
;
Liquidation Order
;
Liquidation-Cost
;
Liquidation-Liquidator-Appointment Tenure & Fee
Section:
33
;
33(2)
;
5(16)
;
CA-230
The Liquidator is aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority, the present appeal is filed on the ground that the Adjudicating Authority held that the fees payable to the Liquidator will become payable only upon occurrence of the events of respective receipts and disbursals at specified rates payable and not otherwise. The Adjudicating Authority directed the Liquidator to desist from claiming the amounts towards liquidator fees as immediately payable.
NCLAT-New Delhi

Question of the right of second charge holder to claim priority over the first charge holder - ASREC (India) Ltd. Vs. Divyesh Desai - NCLAT New Delhi

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 582 NCLAT
Case Name:
ASREC (India) Ltd. Vs. Divyesh Desai
Order Date:
05/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-303/2020-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Precision Fasteners Ltd.
Subjects:
Liquidation-Distribution of Assets [Sec. 53]
;
Liquidation-Secured Creditors-Security realized/enforcement
;
Liquidation-Secured Creditors-Security relinquished
Section:
53
;
53(1)
;
53(1)(b)(ii)
NCLAT-New Delhi

Judgment on principle of resjudicata under IBC - Doctrine of resjudicata is applicable even to the proceedings under IBC and challenge to the findings in incidental or collateral proceedings amounts to an abuse of process of Court - Vikas Dahiya (Ex-Director of Golden Tobacco Ltd.) Vs. Arrow Engineering Ltd. - NCLAT New Delhi

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 577 NCLAT
Case Name:
Vikas Dahiya (Ex-Director of Golden Tobacco Ltd.) Vs. Arrow Engineering Ltd.
Order Date:
05/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-699/2022-NCLAT
CA(AT)(I)-812/2022-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Golden Tobacco Ltd.
Subjects:
Appeals-Appeal u/s Sec. 42, 61 & 62
;
NCLAT/NCLAT-Review/Modification of Order
Section:
NCLAT held that the Hon’ble Apex Court, recently held that doctrine of resjudicata is applicable to proceedings under IBC also in Ebix Singapore Pte Ltd. vs Committee Of Creditors Of Educomp (2021) ibclaw.in 153 SC held that the doctrine of resjudicata is applicable to the proceeding of IBC. In view of the principle laid down in the above judgment strictly doctrine of resjudicata is applicable even to the proceedings under IBC and challenge to the findings in incidental or collateral proceedings amounts to an abuse of process of Court. In any view of the matter, when the Appellant raised a specific ground before the Adjudicating Authority and before this Tribunal in the first round of litigation as narrated above, against the order passed by this Tribunal in judgment passed in Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No. 183 of 2021, affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 7715 of 2021 dated 05.05.2022, again raising such grounds in the second round of litigation in incidental proceedings is nothing but an abuse of process of Court. It also held that judgment obtained by playing fraud on the Tribunal or judgment or order passed without inherent jurisdiction is nonest in the eye of law and the same can be challenged in a collateral or incidental proceeding, but it was not the case of the Appellants in these appeals. Hence in any collateral or incidental proceeding, the judgment cannot be agitated which attained finality. If such course is permitted it would amount to exercise of power of review of its own judgment or sitting over the judgment in appeal against its own order or judgment which is impermissible under law.
High Court-Delhi

No claim after approval of Resolution Plan even a show-cause notice issued prior to initiation of CIRP - Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. Vs. Union of India - Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 170 HC
Case Name:
Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Order Date:
21/07/2022
Appeal No.:
WP(C)-24458/2020-HC
WP(C)-7248/2020-HC
Corporate Debtor:
Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd
Subjects:
CIRP-V RP-Cases/Liabilities after Approved Resolution Plan
Section:
This writ petition is directed against the Order-in-Original dated 27.07.2020, passed by the respondent no. 3 i.e., Additional Director General (Adjudication) Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The petitioner, Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. is aggrieved that even though a resolution plan has received the approval of the NCLT, Delhi Bench, by virtue of the impugned order, a demand has been foisted on the petitioner. The transactions in issue, qua which demand has been raised by the respondents/revenue concerns the Financial Year (FY) 2013-2014. Respondent no.3 had issued a show-cause notice on 01.06.2016.
NCLAT-New Delhi

Gajendra Investment Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Jayesh N. Sanghrajka & Ors. - NCLAT New Delhi

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 576 NCLAT
Case Name:
Gajendra Investment Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Jayesh N. Sanghrajka & Ors.
Order Date:
08/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-883/2022-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Subjects:
Section:
NCLAT-New Delhi

Once after the completion of liquidation an application is filed by the liquidator of a Corporate Debtor for its dissolution to the Adjudicating Authority, who has no option but to pass an order of dissolution - Sudhir Kumar Goel (Promoter of Shashi Oils & Fats Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. M/s Shashi Oils and Fats Pvt. Ltd. - NCLAT New Delhi

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 565 NCLAT
Case Name:
Sudhir Kumar Goel (Promoter) Vs. M/s Shashi Oils and Fats Pvt. Ltd.
Order Date:
04/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-676/2021-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Shashi Oils and Fats Pvt. Ltd.
Subjects:
Cases/Liabilities after sold under Liquidation
;
Liquidation-Dissolution [Sec. 54]
Section:
54
NCLAT held that once the Company is dissolved under Section 54 of the Code, nothing remains. In view of provisions contained in Section 54 of the IBC, once after the completion of liquidation an application is filed by the liquidator of a Corporate Debtor for its dissolution to the Adjudicating Authority, who has no option but to pass an order of dissolution. In the present case the Adjudicating Authority has simply complied with the provisions under Section 54(2) of the Code. It is very much clear that the Company is fully dissolved. This dissolution happens when the company is liquidated.
NCLT-Kolkata Bench

Neither does the Code regulate nor does the Code provide or delegate powers and/or authority to the liquidator to restrain or restrict the Creditor from charging interest for the period after filing of Claim and actually enforcing its security interest and realizing its debt due - Kuldeep Verma, the Liquidator of Eastern Gases Ltd. Vs. DBS Bank Ltd. - NCLT Kolkata Bench

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 691 NCLT
Case Name:
Kuldeep Verma the Liquidator of Eastern Gases Ltd. Vs. DBS Bank Ltd.
Order Date:
14/07/2022
Appeal No.:
CP(IB)-482/KB/2017-NCLT
Corporate Debtor:
Eastern Gases Ltd.
Subjects:
Section:
52
;
52(7)
According to the applicant as contended in paragraph 18, it could only be till the commencement of liquidation whereas as per the respondent which could raise its claims in the form of interest etc. till actual realization. For analysing submission on behalf of the Bank and to decide the issue in hand, it is relevant to refer to Chapter IV Regulation 12 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process)Regulation 2016. A plain reading of even the previous regulation, prior to 25-07-2019,makes clear that it is the date of commencement of liquidation and 30 days thereafter which is time limit and stage for submission of the claims by stakeholders. Admittedly, respondent submitted his claims in form D. Now we see from Form D (Proof of claims of Financial Creditors) or Form C (Proof of claim of operation creditor except workmen and employees), part of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.
NCLAT-New Delhi

The CIRP cannot be allowed to continue for indefinite period - M/s. Cimco Projects Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Mr. Anup Kumar (RP) M/s. Shivkala Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. - NCLAT New Delhi

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 573 NCLAT
Case Name:
M/s. Cimco Projects Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Mr. Anup Kumar (RP) M/s. Shivkala Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Order Date:
01/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(I)-128/2022-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Shivkala Developers Pvt. Ltd.
Subjects:
CIRP-V RP-Request for Resolution Plan
Section:
74
;
74(3)
NCLAT held that the CIRP is a time bound process where timeline has been prescribed for each step. The CIRP cannot be allowed to continue for indefinite period. When Appellant has submitted the Resolution Plan which was approved on 08.11.2018, he cannot just say that he was not aware of the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority for approval of the Resolution Plan.
NCLAT-Chennai

The provisions of law empower CoC contemplated under Section 22 of the IBC, 2016 either to continue the IRP as RP or replace the IRP - M/s IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. C.J. Davis IRP of Tip Top Furniture Pvt. Ltd. - NCLAT Chennai

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2022) ibclaw.in 574 NCLAT
Case Name:
M/s IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. C.J. Davis IRP of Tip Top Furniture Pvt. Ltd.
Order Date:
02/08/2022
Appeal No.:
CA(AT)(CH)(I)-116/2022-NCLAT
Corporate Debtor:
Tip Top Furniture Pvt. Ltd.
Subjects:
CIRP-II IRP/RP-Appointment, Replace. & Tenure of IRP/RP
Section:
22
;
22(3)
;
22(3)(b)
;
22(4)
;
22(5)
NCLAT held that the provisions of law empower the CoC contemplated under Section 22 of the I&B Code, 2016 either to continue the IRP as RP or replace the IRP. When the provisions are unambiguous and authorises the CoC to act in accordance with law the same cannot be interfered with by the Tribunals unless and until it is arbitrary, illegal and irrational and dehors the provisions of the Code and the Rules.
1 2 3 636

For any suggestion/discrepancy, please WhatsApp to +91 9577994433.
Please submit here your quote about IBC Laws services, we publish it on our website in “What Our Visitors say” Section.

Read our disclaimer, copyright, policies, terms of services, etc.

Copyright © IBC Laws