196 (1) (t)

Suspension of authorisation for assignment (AFA) pending consideration of show cause notices issued under Section 219 of IBC is not contrary to law | Clause 23A of Model Bye-Laws and Governing Board of IPAs Regulations, 2016 cannot be held to be ultra vires – Kairav Anil Trivedi Vs. Insolvency & Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and Ors. – Bombay High Court

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court (Division Bench) did not find that Clause 23A of the Schedule of IBBI (Model Bye-Laws and Governing Board of Insolvency Professional Agencies) Regulations, 2016 travel beyond what has been empowered to be done under the Code.

The Bench also considered the office noting placed on record which indicates that DGM (IBBI) was directed to undertake investigation and held that it cannot be said that the Investigating Authority in the absence of any order in writing proceeded to conduct an investigation in terms of Section 218(1) of the Code.

The Court referring the decision in CA V. Venkata Sivakumar Vs. IBBI and Ors. (2024) ibclaw.in 59 HC did not find that the suspension of AFA pending consideration of the show cause notices is in any manner contrary to law or unwarranted in the facts of the present case.

Suspension of authorisation for assignment (AFA) pending consideration of show cause notices issued under Section 219 of IBC is not contrary to law | Clause 23A of Model Bye-Laws and Governing Board of IPAs Regulations, 2016 cannot be held to be ultra vires – Kairav Anil Trivedi Vs. Insolvency & Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and Ors. – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Para 2.1 “Amount realized” and Para 2.5 “Period for calculation of fee” of IBBI Circular dated 28.09.2023 are struck down as being ultra vires the Liquidation Process Regulations and the IBC | Para 2.2 “other liquidation cost”, Para 2.3 “Amount distributed to stakeholders” and Para 2.4 “Amount of Realisation/Distribution” are upheld – Amit Gupta Vs. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India and Anr. – Bombay High Court

In this landmark judgment, a division bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay interpreted all five paras of the IBBI Circular issued on 28.09.2023.

The Hon’ble Bench also held that the very issuance of a show cause notice has the effect of stopping the IP from taking up new work by reason of Bye-Law 23A in the Model Bye-Laws that are statutorily specified in the Schedule. The Court takes judicial notice of the serious repercussions on IPs when the IBBI issues a show cause notice. The moment disciplinary proceedings are initiated, the IP’s authorisation to conduct his assignments stands suspended. Such a position enabled by subordinate law can have serious implications for IPs. This position may also have the effect making the IBBI reticent to issue show cause notices, considering the debilitating impact it can have on any IP. This situation deserves to be reviewed by the IBBI.

Para 2.1 “Amount realized” and Para 2.5 “Period for calculation of fee” of IBBI Circular dated 28.09.2023 are struck down as being ultra vires the Liquidation Process Regulations and the IBC | Para 2.2 “other liquidation cost”, Para 2.3 “Amount distributed to stakeholders” and Para 2.4 “Amount of Realisation/Distribution” are upheld – Amit Gupta Vs. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India and Anr. – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top