Set aside/Partial Set aside

Byju’s Insolvency Case: Granting of the License for Advertisement and Promotional rights itself amounts to providing of services and falls within the definition of Operational Debt within the meaning of Section 5(21) of the IBC – The Board of Control for Cricket In India (BCCI) Vs. Think & Learn Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Bengaluru Bench

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

Byju’s Insolvency Case: Granting of the License for Advertisement and Promotional rights itself amounts to providing of services and falls within the definition of Operational Debt within the meaning of Section 5(21) of the IBC – The Board of Control for Cricket In India (BCCI) Vs. Think & Learn Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Bengaluru Bench Read Post »

There is no provision in Insolvency Code for extension of PPIRP Time limit under Section 54D of IBC – Vikash Gautamchand Jain RP of Kethos Tiles Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Ahmedabad Bench

Hon’ble NCLT Ahmedabad Bench held that a plain reading of Section 54D of IBC reveals that a time period of 120 days from the date of commencement of PPIRP is provided in the Act. As per Section 54D(3), if no Resolution Plan is approved by CoC the RP shall file an Application for Termination of PPIRP. Contrary to the Section Resolution Professional in the present matter has filed an Application seeking extension of time.

There is no provision in Insolvency Code for extension of PPIRP Time limit under Section 54D of IBC – Vikash Gautamchand Jain RP of Kethos Tiles Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Ahmedabad Bench Read Post »

Whether Banks/NBFCs are bound under Notification dated 29.05.2015 issued u/s 9 of the MSMED Act, 2006 to adopt Restructuring Process on its own without there being any application by MSMEs – A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors. – Bombay High Court

In this case, the MSMEs/Borrowers have challenged the very action of declaring them as NPA under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, without following the procedure of restructuring as contemplated under the Notification dated 29.05.2015 issued under Section 9 of the MSMED Act, 2006.
Hon’ble High Court of Bombay holds that:
(i) The whole process as provided under the said Notification starts from identification of ‘Incipient Stress’ in the account of an MSME and thereafter classifying it in 3 sub-categories provided as per Clause 1(1) of the said Notification.
(ii) The said Notification can be pressed into service only and only after the MSME [such as the Petitioners] approaches the Banks/NBFCs with an appropriate application supported by an affidavit of the authorized person placing on record the bundle of facts which lead to the conclusion of incipient stress and only after that, the Banks or NBFCs are required to categorize them as SMA-0, SMA-1 and SMA-2.

Whether Banks/NBFCs are bound under Notification dated 29.05.2015 issued u/s 9 of the MSMED Act, 2006 to adopt Restructuring Process on its own without there being any application by MSMEs – A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors. – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Transfer of loan from Principal Borrower to Corporate Debtor through assignment agreement, which is not stamped is a void contract and insolvency u/s 7 of IBC cannot be initiated against the Corporate Debtor – Vinsari Fruitech Ltd. v. Effort BPO Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

In this case, Principal Borrower has assigned the loan take from Financial Creditor to Corporate Debtor. The Finance Creditor files CIRP application u/s 7 of IBC against the Corporate Debtor.
NCLT Mumbai Bench refers judgment in N.N. Global Mercantile Pvt .Ltd. v Indo Unique Flame Ltd. and Other (2023) ibclaw.in 56 SC and held that the contract, which is unstamped or insufficiently stamped, void, and the said decision further lays down the principle that such contract gets revived upon payment of duty with penalty under the Stamp Act. The affected party can approach the collector of stamps, Mumbai, Maharashtra to adjudicate the quantum of stamp duty payable on the the document and, thereafter upon payment of such stamp duty, the affected party shall be at liberty to file appropriate application in terms of legally enforceable assignment deed.

Transfer of loan from Principal Borrower to Corporate Debtor through assignment agreement, which is not stamped is a void contract and insolvency u/s 7 of IBC cannot be initiated against the Corporate Debtor – Vinsari Fruitech Ltd. v. Effort BPO Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Scroll to Top