I B C Archives - Page 4 of 8 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

May 10, 2025 12:17 am

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016- Sections 18 and 25 – Exclusion of assets owned by a third-party, but in the possession of the Corporate Debtor held under contractual arrangements, from the definition of the expression “assets”, is limited to Section 18 – In other words, the Explanation under Section 18 does not extend to Section 25.

Mar 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VICTORY IRON WORKS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. JITENDRA LOHIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Civil…

I B C

HELD allow the Resolution Plan (RP) preferred by Authum Investment and Infrastructure Limited (AIIL) qua the debenture holders, except the dissenting debenture holders – Direction that the dissenting debenture holders should be provided an option to accept the terms of the RP. Alternatively, the dissenting debenture holders will have a right to stand outside the proposed RP framed

Mar 7, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AUTHUM INVESTMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. R.K. MOHATTA FAMILY TRUST AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Aravind Kumar,…

I B C

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 9 – Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 – Sections 22(1) and 22(5) – Application under Section 9 of IBC – – in accordance with the factual position obtained in any particular case viz., the period of delay and the period covered by suspension of right under Section 22 (1), SICA etc., the question of condonation of delay has to be considered lest it will result in injustice as the party was statutorily prevented from initiating action against the industrial company concerned.

Jan 8, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SABARMATI GAS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SHAH ALLOYS LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

I B C

IBC, 2016 – Section 9 – HELD application filed by the first respondent against the second respondent under Section 9 will stand rejected. In view of the fact that the appellant succeeds on the basis that there is a pre-existing dispute within the meaning of IBC

Oct 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJRATAN BABULAL AGARWAL — Appellant Vs. SOLARTEX INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…

I B C

IBC, 2016 Ss 7 & 9 – Limitation – HELD It would be absurd to hold that the CIRP could be initiated by filing an application under Section 7 or Section 9 of the IBC, within three years from the date on which an application under those provisions of the IBC could have first been made before the NCLT even though the right to sue may have accrued decades ago.

Sep 24, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH M/S TECH SHARP ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. SANGHVI MOVERS LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. )…

I B C

Gujarat Value Added Tax, 2003 – IBC – State is a secured creditor under the GVAT Act. Section 3(30) of the IBC defines secured creditor to mean a creditor in favour of whom security interest is credited. Such security interest could be created by operation of law – Definition of secured creditor in the IBC does not exclude any Government or Governmental Authority

Sep 11, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH STATE TAX OFFICER (1) — Appellant Vs. RAINBOW PAPERS LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,, 2016 – Section 7 – CIRP can be initiated against the Corporate Guarantor without proceeding against the principal borrower – Liability of the guarantor is co-extensive with that of the Principal Borrower

Sep 11, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH K. PARAMASIVAM — Appellant Vs. THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. )…

I B C

Insolvency process – Limitation – Burden of prima facie proving occurrence of the default and that the application filed under Section 7 of the Code is within the period of limitation, is entirely on the financial creditor

Aug 21, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAJENDRA NAROTTAMDAS SHETH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and…

I B C

IBC – Application under Section 7 not barred if there were an acknowledgement of the debt by the Corporate Debtor before expiry of the period of limitation of three years, in which case the period of limitation would get extended by a further period of three years.

Aug 14, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LIMITED — Appellant Vs. TULIP STAR HOTELS LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari,…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Sections 7 and 7(5)(b) – An appeal being the continuation of original proceedings, the provision of Section 7(5)(b) of the IBC, of notifying the Financial Creditor before rejection of a claim, would be attracted

Aug 8, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED — Appellant Vs. KEW PRECISION PARTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari,…

You missed

Service

Under Rule 17, CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, prior contractual service counts towards pension upon subsequent regularisation, subject to the employee opting to refund/forgo specified monetary benefits.

May 6, 2025 sclaw

I B C

Service of an IBC Section 8 demand notice upon Key Managerial Personnel at the Corporate Debtor’s registered office constitutes valid service on the company, emphasizing substance over technical form.

May 6, 2025 sclaw

Cr P C

High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings precludes conducting a ‘mini trial’ by assessing evidence credibility; consistency requires acknowledging coordinate bench decisions involving co-accused.

May 5, 2025 sclaw

Cr P C

Quashing FIR under 482 CrPC impermissible when complaint prima facie discloses cognizable offences; allegations accepted true, investigation not thwarted based on delay, civil suit, or witness status if complicity alleged.

May 5, 2025 sclaw

Category: I B C

You missed