I B C Archives - Supreme Court of India Judgements

July 31, 2026 5:50 pm

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 31 — ‘Clean slate’ doctrine — Effect of approved Resolution Plan on claims — Upon approval under S. 31(1), claims provided in the Plan stand frozen and are binding on the Corporate Debtor and all stakeholders — Claims not incorporated in the Plan stand extinguished, withdrawn or abated — Resolution Applicant entitled to commence operations free from unforeseen liabilities — Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons v. Edelweiss ARC, (2021) 9 SCC 657, followed.

Jul 19, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 717 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S TATA STEEL LTD Vs. VARSHA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Manoj Misra and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos. 9052-9053…

C P C I B C

Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 — Section 9(2) — “Decree or order” — Whether includes a recovery certificate issued by a Debts Recovery Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (pre-2016 amendment) — Held, no — Insolvency Act, being weighed with grave civil consequence of “civil death”, must be strictly construed — Expression “decree or order” must bear the meaning assigned under Ss. 2(2) and 2(14), CPC, requiring adjudication by a “court” in a “suit” — A DRT recovery certificate, not being a decree or order of a court within this meaning, cannot found an insolvency notice under S. 9(2) — Ratio of Paramjeet Singh Patheja v. ICDS Ltd., (2006) 13 SCC 322 (rendered qua arbitral awards) held to rest on a wider principle applicable equally to DRT recovery certificates — Impugned judgment of Division Bench, Bombay High Court, affirming Single Judge’s quashing of insolvency notice, upheld.

Jul 15, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 688 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH H.D.F.C. BANK LIMITED Vs. KISHORE K. MEHTA (DEAD) THR. LRS. ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Sections 7 and 14 — Corporate guarantee — Effect of demerger/amalgamation of corporate debtor — NCLT admission order under S. 7 relying on six judicial precedents to reject corporate guarantor’s plea that liability stood extinguished on demerger/amalgamation — NCLAT dismissing appeal and reproducing the same precedents — On independent verification by Supreme Court, found that of the six citations, one carried a wrong citation of an existing but different judgment together with a non-existent paragraph, three were altogether non-existent citations, and two, though correctly cited, contained paragraphs not traceable to the actual reported judgments — Held, the citations relied upon by NCLT were fake, non-existent or hallucinated, apparently AI-generated, and NCLAT failed to detect the fabrication — Orders of NCLT dated 28.08.2024 and NCLAT dated 11.09.2025 set aside — Section 7 application restored to its original number for fresh disposal strictly on merits, without expression of any opinion by the Supreme Court — NCLT directed to dispose of the application expeditiously, preferably within two weeks, with parties to maintain status quo in the interregnum.

Jul 2, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 668 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH POOJA RAMESH SINGH Vs. JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ.…

Cheque Dishonour I B C

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Sections 138 & 141 — Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Part III (Personal Insolvency) — Moratorium Provisions — Criminal Proceedings vs. Civil Liability — Dishonour of cheque is a criminal offence due to specific deeming fiction in Section 138, not merely a civil wrong for debt recovery, even though it arises from a debt — Held, moratorium under IBC Part III does not stay criminal proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 579 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DINESHCHAND SURANA Vs. UCO BANK ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K. V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No….of 2026 (Arising…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Letter of Intent (LoI) — Appellant’s claim that LoIs were conditional due to clauses concerning pending judicial orders and staff/employee litigation rejected — NCLT and NCLAT found appellant was aware of these issues and discussions in CoC meetings — Appellant’s arguments of conditional LoI were considered an “after-thought” and an attempt to renege from the plan.

May 31, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 580 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAY DAVE Vs. ANDHRA BANK LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : K. V. Viswanathan and Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ. ) Civil…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 61 — Appeal against NCLT order — Requirement of certified copy of impugned order — Rules for filing appeal before NCLAT — Presentation of appeals under Rule 22 of NCLAT Rules, 2016 — Appeal must be accompanied by a certified copy of impugned order — Applying for certified copy before expiry of limitation period is crucial for excluding time taken to procure it — Failure to file certified copy or obtain exemption renders appeal incompetent — NCLAT wrongly condoned delay in filing and refiling appeal without ensuring compliance with essential requirements.

May 14, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 479 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANGELWOODS APARTMENT ALLOTTEES ASSOCIATION Vs. M LALITHA AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. ) Civil…

I B C

Corporate Veil — Lifting of — May be lifted where associated companies are inextricably connected, forming part of one concern, or to prevent evasion of obligations or protect public interest. In this case, subsidiary companies were found to be mere fronts for the holding company’s development activities, justifying lifting the corporate veil.

May 12, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 449 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ALPHA CORP DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GNIDA) AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 5(8) — Financial Debt — Corporate Guarantees — A liability arising from corporate guarantee for money borrowed against interest qualifies as financial debt — The execution of corporate guarantees, even if challenged on grounds of timing or non-disclosure, are considered valid and enforceable if their execution is admitted or demonstrably proven, making the appellants entitled to recognition as financial creditors.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 423 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. DOHA BANK Q.P.S.C. AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe,…

I B C Limitation

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 7 — Application under — Limitation period — Calculation — Default date — Right to file application under Section 7 of IBC accrues on the date of default, which is when the corporate debtor first fails to discharge its repayment obligations — Limitation begins to run from the date of classification of the account as Non — Performing Asset (NPA) — Application filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation, even after considering extensions due to CIRP and Covid — 19 pandemic, is barred by limitation — NCLT and NCLAT orders admitting the application are quashed and set aside.

Apr 30, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 429 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHANKAR KHANDELWAL Vs. OMKARA ASSET RECONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD AND ANOTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. )…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Sections 7, 3(10), 5(7), 5(8) — Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) — Admission of petition — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order and directing admission of Section 7 petition — Held, IBC is not a debt recovery legislation but for reorganisation and insolvency resolution — Initiation of CIRP as a substitute for execution of a civil court decree is an abuse of process.

Apr 27, 2026 sclaw

2026 INSC 410 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANJANI TECHNOPLAST LTD. Vs. SHUBH GAUTAM ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 8247…

You missed

Will & Succession

Hindu female’s property devolves equally on husband and daughter separately; gift of undivided coparcenary share needs no co-owner’s consent. A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — Section 15(1)(a) — Devolution of Female Intestate’s Property — Properties of a Hindu female dying intestate devolve, in the absence of sons/daughters’ issue predeceasing her, upon her husband and daughter in equal shares under Section 15(1)(a); such undivided share in the husband’s hands does not partake the character of coparcenary property.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Service

Armed Forces — Air Force Order No. 33/2017 — Prior Permission for Civil Post — Mandatory Nature — Requirement of seeking prior permission before applying for a civil post, and subsequent grant of NOC, held mandatory and not merely procedural/directory, since AFO 33/2017 has necessary nexus with regulating premature discharge of Airmen and its object of maintaining operational preparedness of the Air Force.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 — Deficiency of Service — Maintenance Contractor’s Liability — Elevator Malfunction — Comprehensive maintenance contractor, being both manufacturer and repair contractor with exclusive technical knowledge of safety interlocks and brake mechanisms, held principally deficient in service for failing to act on its own identified remedy (voltage stabiliser) despite repeated notice of persistent malfunction over several months preceding fatal accident.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Service

Public Service Commission consultation before extending officiating appointment is directory not mandatory; ad-hoc service counts towards seniority computation. A. Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005 — Rule 24(4) — Uttaranchal Public Service Commission (Limitations of Functions) Regulations, 2003 — Regulation 5(a) — Nature of Requirement — Requirement of consulting Commission before continuation of officiating appointment beyond one year held directory, not mandatory, applying the classic test of statutory construction; non-compliance does not invalidate the appointment where treating it as void would cause serious inconvenience to persons with no control over the defaulting authority.

Jul 30, 2026 sclaw

Category: I B C

You missed