A Successful Resolution Applicant Cannot Escape Through A 'Conditional' Letter Of Intent

For some years, the position under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been settled. A successful resolution applicant cannot withdraw or modify a resolution plan once the committee of creditors (CoC) has approved it and the plan has gone to the adjudicating authority. The Supreme Court said as much in Ebix Singapore (P) Ltd. v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Ltd., 2021 LiveLaw (SC) 447, holding that the Code leaves a resolution applicant no way out and th at the NCLT...

Cross Border Insolvency In India: What Rules Must Say

A view from the corridorIn May 2023, Go First – an Indian low-cost airline – filed for voluntary insolvency under section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) admitted the application and imposed a moratorium under section 14.[1]That much was routine. What followed was not.The aircraft lessors – companies such as Pembroke Aircraft Leasing, SMBC Aviation Capital and Accipiter Investments – had already terminated their lease agreements. They...

'SARFAESI Timeline Mandatory' : Supreme Court Cancels Auction Sale After 16 Yrs Over 5-Day Delay In Payment Of Balance

The Court held that the time period to deposit balance amount as per Rul 9(4) of Security Interest Rules is mandatory.

IBC | Delay In Re-Filing Defective Appeal After Curing Defects Cannot Be Condoned : Supreme Court

The Court also observed that the Supreme Court Rules cannot override the mandate under the IBC.

S.35L Central Excise Act | Only Supreme Court Can Decide Appeals On Question Of Excisability; Not High Courts: SC

The Supreme Court has held that disputes relating to the excisability of goods fall within its exclusive appellate jurisdiction and cannot be decided by High Courts under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.“An appeal from an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal relating to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of excise duty or to the value of goods for...

Green Competition: Why India's Competition Act Must Account For Environment

India has transformed how it thinks about corporate wrongdoing. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act,2023 decriminalized over 183 provisions across 42 Central Acts, converting criminal penalties into civil ones with enhanced monetary fines. The aim is straightforward, ease of doing buisness, not jail terms should be the default response to corporate non-compliance. The Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023 reflects the same instinct with heavier penalties, faster process but no prison bars...

Companies Act | Supreme Court Rejects 'Vote-Cast-First' Rule For Societies In AGMs; Only Person Lawfully Authorised Can Vote: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that when there exists a dispute between the rival societies over the exercise of the voting rights at the Company's Annual General Meeting, where they hold shares, then the voting rights must be exercised by persons lawfully authorised under the society's governing documents and in accordance with the statutory framework governing corporate voting....

Courts Have Sometimes Failed Arbitration In India; Judicial Interference Often A Cure Without A Disease: Supreme Court

Uniformity in dispute resolution enhances ease of doing business and attract foreign investment, the Court said.

Disgorgement As A Regulatory Remedy Under SEBI Act

Disgorgement is a legal remedy that helps restore fairness and prevent future wrongdoing. It requires a court or regulatory authority to force a wrongdoer to give up profits or benefits gained through misconduct. Unlike compensatory damages, which are meant to repay victims for their losses, disgorgement aims to strip offenders of their unjust profits. The main idea is that no one should benefit from illegal, fraudulent, or unethical actions.In securities regulation, especially under the system...

Supreme Court Grants Relief To Reliance Industries In 2007 RPL Futures Trading Case, Sets Aside SEBI's ₹447 Crore Disgorgement Order

The Supreme Court on Friday (May 29) set aside the ₹447.27 crore disgorgement order imposed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India, being approved by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, on Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) in connection with alleged manipulative trading in the futures segment of Reliance Petroleum Ltd. (RPL) during November 2007. Partly allowing the appeal filed by...

Arbitration | Writ Jurisdiction Can't Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitrator's Decision Under Section 16 : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that while exercising its Writ Jurisdiction, it is impermissible for the High Courts to interfere with the arbitral tribunal's order passed under Section 16 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. “It was not open for the learned Single Judge in exercise of writ jurisdiction to enter into the merits of the dispute while adjudicating the challenge to an...

S.33(1)(a) Arbitration Act Only To Correct Clerical Errors In Award; Can't Be Invoked To Change Nature Of Interest : Supreme Court

Holding that substance of an arbitral award cannot be altered under the guise of correcting errors, the Supreme Court has ruled that changing the nature of interest awarded from simple interest to compound interest amounts to a substantive modification that falls outside the limited scope of Section 33(1)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.A bench of Justice PS Narasimha and...