10 Recent Decisions on IBC, 2016
1. Whether the remarks regarding ‘Default’ on the part of the Personal Guarantor should sustain ? Citation - [2021] GCtR 3041
2. Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP)'s conduct deprecated ; appeal dismissed. Citation : [2022] GCtR 109
3. Delay in filing appeals under IBC, 2016 : Delay in refiling the Memo of Appeal condoned. Citation - [2022] GCtR 112
4.Modification of Resolution Plan - Order under challenge upheld. Citation - [2022] GCtR 113
5. If an application for early hearing for appeal filed under IBC, 2016 is filed, then it can be directed that the said appeal is to be listed for hearing after 9 days when the application for urgent hearing was heard. Citation - [2022] GCtR 114
6. An application under S.9 of IBC, 2016 was rejected which was challenged by way of appeal. Purport of Hon'ble Delhi High Court's Judgment referred by a party explained and clarified. Citation - [2022] GCtR 115
7. When a person whose name from the list of Resolution applicants has been removed which was also affirmed by NCLT, then if such person approaches NCLAT, then NCLAT has power to direct CoC not to take final decision on Resolution Plan for a certain time. Citation - [2022] GCtR 116
8.Definition of "debt" under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC") explained. Order admitting application against Corporate Debtor was set aside. Citation - [2022] GCtR 117
9. Appeal was filed by the Director of the Corporate Debtor Company. Moratorium was there in operation and Ld. NCLT had passed an Order against Director of the Company which was a corporate debtor. Corporate Debtor Director's appeal dismissed. Citation - [2022] GCtR 118
10. Citing the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court and explaining the role of NCLT through judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the need of CoC's approval in factual background of this case was also discussed. It has been commented after referring facts that NCLT has not considered the facts ; Order of NCLT was finally set aside. The plea of the party which had initiated CIRP was allowed. Citation - [2022] GCtR 119
Written by
Vishal
Guwahati, Assam
Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made. All disputes shall be subject to Guwahati Jurisdiction.