Latest court orders, judgments, and legal developments from Indian courts — AI-curated and summarized.
The NCLT has admitted a plea under Section 7 against SWAL Limited, affirming that inter-corporate loans with interest are classified as financial debts under the IBC.
The Calcutta High Court ruled that a resolution applicant is not responsible for a corporate debtor's pre-Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) late payment surcharge (LPSC), highlighting the 'clean slate' principle in insolvency cases.
The NCLAT has ruled that the submission of a resolution professional's report is not required when debt and default are clearly established, affirming the role of the guarantor's signature as proof of liability.
The NCLT Kochi has dismissed a ₹1,323 crore insolvency petition by Morgan Securities against BPL, ruling that the IBC cannot function as a recovery tool when arbitration remedies have been pursued.
The NCLAT has ruled that a loan agreement signature suffices to affirm guarantor liability, even in the absence of a formal deed. This decision validates the initiation of insolvency proceedings under the IBC.
The Kerala High Court declined to direct CBI/ED investigations against the resolution professional of Byju's, referencing the pending stayed FIR in Karnataka HC.
NCLT confirmed that a ₹200 crore capital infusion proposed in a resolution plan is distinct from the creditor settlement, thereby approving Hind Agro's plan under the IBC.
The NCLT ruled that a ₹200 crore future capital infusion must be treated separately from the creditor settlement under the resolution plan approved for Hind Agro.
NCLT approved Hind Agro’s ₹95 crore resolution plan, ruling that investments for future business revival cannot be included in the resolution plan value.
The NCLT ruled that a bank’s unilateral transfer of a corporate debtor’s funds cannot be reversed as a preferential transaction under Section 43 of the IBC in the absence of any preference by the debtor.
The NCLT has ruled that claims for avoidance relief under Section 43 of the IBC are invalid without evidence demonstrating that preferential treatment was granted by the corporate debtor.
The Calcutta High Court confirms that it can transfer pending winding-up proceedings at its discretion if they have not reached an irreversible stage.