×

or

A Legal Round-Up of The Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC)

A Legal Round-Up of The Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC)
STATUTORY UPDATES
  • INSOLVENCY PROFESSIONALS TO ACT AS INTERIM RESOLUTION PROFESSIONALS, LIQUIDATORS, RESOLUTION PROFESSIONALS AND BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES (RECOMMENDATION) GUIDELINES, 2021 (01.06.2021)
  • The IBBI on June 1, 2021 has issued Insolvency Professionals to act as Interim Resolution Professionals, Liquidators, Resolution Professionals and Bankruptcy Trustees (Recommendation) Guidelines, 2021. These Guidelines have been issued in supersession of the earlier Guidelines issued on November 23, 2020. The IBBI is required to recommend the names of Insolvency professionals (IP) to an Adjudicating Authority for the appointment as an Interim Resolution Professional or Liquidator in accordance with the provisions of IBC. The IBBI, in order to save time and have an efficient process in place as references/ directions from the Adjudicating Authority to it is a time-consuming process and involves complexities, IBBI created Insolvency Professionals to act as Interim Resolution Professionals, Liquidators, Resolution Professionals and Bankruptcy Trustees (Recommendation) Guidelines, 2021. These guidelines provide for the following:

    • That IBBI shall form a panel of Insolvency Professionals for identifying and recommending the names of the Insolvency Professionals to the AA and shall also form a common panel for the appointment of IRP, Liquidators, Resolution Professional and Bankruptcy trustee and will share it with the AA.
    • Based on the registered office, the panel will contain a zone wise list of IP
    • Validity of a panel shall be 6 months and every earlier panel shall be replaced by a new panel every 6 months.
    • Any name from the panel for the appointment of an IRP, Liquidator, RP or BT shall be picked up by the NCLT for a corporate insolvency resolution process, liquidation process, insolvency resolution or bankruptcy process in relation to a corporate debtor and personal guarantors to corporate debtors, as the case maybe.
    • Any name from the panel for the appointment as RP or BT shall be picked up by the DRT for an Insolvency Resolution or Bankruptcy Process for personal guarantors to corporate debtors, as the case may be.
    • Guidelines also provide details of the eligibility and obligations of an IP to be included in the panel.

    The Guidelines shall come into effect for appointments as IRP, Liquidator, RP and BT with effect from July 1, 2021.

SUPREME COURT
  • LALIT KUMAR JAIN vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS IN TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) NO. 245 of 2020 DATED 21.0.2021
  • The Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld the provisions of the IBC relating to insolvency of personal guarantors, that were brought into force in 2019. The Bench also held that approval of a resolution plan relating to a corporate debtor does not operate so as to discharge the liabilities of personal guarantors (to corporate debtors).

HIGH COURT
  • DREAMZ INFRA INDIA LIMITED V. COMPETENT AUTHORITY WRIT PETITION NO.13477 of 2020 DATED 24.05.2021
  • The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka held that the provisions of the Code shall override the provisions of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004.

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (NCLAT)
  • ANTANIUM HOLDINGS PTE LTD. VS. SUJANA UNIVERSAL INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR. DATED COMPANY APPEAL (AT) (CH) (INS) NO.07 OF 2021 DATED 17.05.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLAT held that the Resolution Plan approved shall not construe any waiver to any statutory obligations/liabilities arising out of the approved Resolution Plan and same shall be dealt in accordance with the appropriate authorities as per relevant laws. It further stated that if any waiver is sought in the Resolution Plan the same shall be subject to approval by the concerned authorities. The Adjudicating Authority is to record analytical subjective satisfaction which is a precondition before according an approval to the Resolution Plan.

  • RONAK KUNDANLAL BHAGAT & ORS. VS. PARIKH RP OF SANGHVI FORGING AND ENGINEERING LTD. & ORS. COMPANY APPEAL (AT) (INS.) NO. 364 OF 2021 DATED 21.05.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLAT held that during CIRP once the Resolution Plan is approved by the Adjudicating Authority. The Appeal can only be filed on the grounds of material irregularity in exercise of powers by the Resolution Plan.

  • BANK OF INDIA & ORS. VS. FERRO ALLOYS CORPORATION LTD. THROUGH MR. BHUBAN COMPANY APPEAL (AT) (Insolvency) No. 590 of 2020 DATED 28.05.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLAT held that merely because the Corporate Debtor had enough liquidity to run the Company as a going concern, the act of the Appellant Banks to adjust the credit balance in the Cash Credit Account towards the debit balance after commencement of CIRP cannot be justified as it is against the provisions of Section 14 of IBC.

  • Mr. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN VS. MR. DEVENDRA P. JAIN LIQUIDATOR OF M/S ASIS LOGISTICS LTD. COMPANY APPEAL (AT) (INSOLVENCY) NO. 1034 OF 2020 DATED 01.06.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLAT held that Notification dated 01.06.2020 changes in criteria for classification of MSME issued under MSMED Act, 2006 and the said notification is applicable to the Corporate Debtor which is still under liquidation and promoters are eligible to file a scheme u/s 230 of the Companies Act, 2013.

  • JAYANTA BANERJEE VS. SHASHI AGARWAL LIQUIDATOR OF INCAB INDUSTRIES LTD. COMPANY APPEAL (AT) (INSOLVENCY) NO. 348 of 2020, DATED 04.06.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLAT held that all statutory provisions for the conduct of CIRP are interlinked, it does not leave any scope to the IRP/RP to skip any of the provisions & when the constitution of the CoC itself is found to be tainted, then the decision of that CoC cannot be validated on the pretext of exercising commercial wisdom.

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
  • M/S UKG STEEL PVT. LTD. VS. EROTIC BUILDCON PVT. LTD. (IB) 1050 of 2020, DATED 31.05.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLT Principal Bench held that if the borrowing given is contrary to the limit prescribed under Companies Act 2013 (Section 186), it is not a legally enforceable debt

  • M/S SIEMENS FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. Vs. MR. VINOD SEHWAG IA 1774/ND/2021 IN THE COMPANY PETITION NO. (IB)-116(ND)/2021, DATED: 09.06.2021
  • The Hon’ble NCLT held that no notice is required to be issued to the Personal Guarantor at the initial stage when the Resolution Professional is appointed. The non-issuance of notice at the time of appointment of RP cannot be held to be a violation of the Principles of Natural Justice.

About Dhir & Dhir Associates

Dhir & Dhir Associates

Dhir & Dhir Associates is a full-service Law Firm and brings to the table expertise and experience of more than two decades across various sectors and practice areas. The firm has been recognised as a leader in Restructuring and Insolvency and widely acclaimed for Banking & Finance, Capital Markets and Securities, Infrastructure, Corporate Advisory, Telecom and Dispute Resolution.