Resolution Plan Approved By CoC Can't Be Withdrawn or Modified By Resolution Applicant: Supreme Court

The Bench Comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta referred to the Judgment of Ebix Singapore Private Limited v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another, where the Supreme Court elaborated and set out several reasons why the resolution applicant cannot be permitted to withdraw or modify the resolution plan after approval by the Committee of Creditors, and before an order under Section 31(1) of the Code is passed. Read More>>

Monthly Digest Of IBC Cases: March 2024

The Supreme Court has reiterated that once a resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) then it becomes impermissible for the resolution applicant to withdraw or modify the resolution plan. Read More>>

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 25th To 31st March 2024

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Chennai Bench, comprising of Justice M. Venugopal (Judicial Member) and Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Judicial Member) and Shri Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member), has held that a Liquidator, after being replaced with another liquidator, cannot seek recall of an order in his personal capacity. If the erstwhile liquidator is aggrieved by an order passed by NCLAT then the remedy would lie in appeal under Section 62 of IBC. Read More>>

NCLAT Delhi Rejects Homebuyers Application To Initiate CIRP Proceeding Against Ansal Hi-Tech Township

Furthermore, NCLAT held that homebuyers are from numerous different projects, and they have not established their case as creditors of a class concerning any particular project registered with RERA to fulfil the requirement of 10% or 100 homebuyers, as stipulated under Section 7(1) of IBC 2016. Read More>>

Besides Section 27, RP Can Be Replaced On A Finding Given By NCLT Over His Conduct Or Any Proven Fact: NCLAT Delhi

The NCLAT upheld the rejection of an application filed by a minority shareholder of the Corporate Debtor seeking replacement of Resolution Professional over mere allegations. Read More>>

NCLAT Delhi: New Resolution Applicants Aren't Entitled To Participate In CIRP And Submit Resolution Plan To NCLT Without Issuance Of Fresh Form G

The Appellant relying upon Regulation 39(1)(b) of the CIRP Regulations, 2016 argued that neither Patanjali nor the other two applicants were included in the list of Prospective Resolution Applicants ('PRAs'), therefore, there was no basis for directing the CoC to consider their applications or Resolution Plans. Read More>>

NCLAT Delhi: Interveners Do Not Have The Right To Seek Relief For Themselves Before The Adjudicating Authority

The Appellate Tribunal observed that interveners are expected to either support the challenged order or the appellant. The individuals who submit their claims to the Insolvency Resolution Professional and whose claims are documented have the complete right to approach the SRA or the Monitoring and Implementation Committee. They are entitled to pursue their entitlements according to the provisions outlined in the Resolution Plan. Read More>>

Party Refuses To Argue Unless Proceedings Are Recorded, NCLT Ahmedabad Adjourns Party's All Cases Sine Dine Till Recording Facility Is Made Available

In a recall application filed by the Applicant, interim prayers were made for switching on the recording feature in Webex platform for audio/video recording of proceedings before NCLT. The NCLT ruled that it is not empowered under NCLT Rules or otherwise to grant such prayer. Read More>>