NCLT Kolkata: NCLT Has No Jurisdiction To Set Aside Arbitral Award Passed During Moratorium Period U/S 14 Of IBC
10 months, 2 weeks ago

NCLT Kolkata: NCLT Has No Jurisdiction To Set Aside Arbitral Award Passed During Moratorium Period U/S 14 Of IBC

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal Kolkata, comprising Smt. Bidisha Banerjee and Shri D. Arvind held that the Adjudicating Authority lacks jurisdiction to set aside an arbitral award even when the award was issued post-initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and during moratorium period under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Subodh Kumar Agarwal, the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor, filed the application seeking an order to set aside the said Arbitral Award in favor of Steel Authority of India and to restrain the Respondent from taking any steps in terms of the said Arbitral Award. NCLT Verdict: The NCLT Kolkata dismissed the application and held that the Adjudicating Authority lacks jurisdiction to set aside an arbitral award even when the award was issued post-initiation of CIRP and during the moratorium period under Section 14 of the IBC. The Tribunal referred to Section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013, stating that while the NCLT can issue an injunction before arbitration, refer parties to arbitration, or enforce arbitration awards, it lacks the authority to set aside an arbitral award.

Kolkata Jurisdiction Tribunal Nclt Set Award Moratorium Authority Adv Arbitral Ibc Cirp Section 14 Nclt Kolkata Subodh Kumar Agarwal Moratorium Period Hindustan Controls Steel Authority  set  passed  kolkata  mr  period  adv  tribunal  aside  jurisdiction  moratorium  nclt  ibc  authority  pvt  award  arbitral

History of this topic

NCLT Has No Jurisdiction To Convict Person For Offence U/S 68 Of IBC In View Of Section 236 Of IBC: NCLAT
2 weeks, 5 days ago

NCLT Has No Jurisdiction To Convict Person For Offence U/S 68 Of IBC In View Of Section 236 Of IBC: NCLAT

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal New Delhi bench of Justice Yogesh Khanna and Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra has held that the National Company Law Tribunal has no jurisdiction to convict a person for an offence under Section 68 under Chapter VII of Part II of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 in view of the express provision contained in …

Arbitral Award Not Signed By All Members Of Tribunal Can Be Set Aside If Reasons For Omission Of Missing Signature Are Not Stated: Delhi High Court
2 weeks, 6 days ago

Arbitral Award Not Signed By All Members Of Tribunal Can Be Set Aside If Reasons For Omission Of Missing Signature Are Not Stated: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has observed that the signature of all members of the arbitral tribunal should be available on the award as the signing of an award is not a ministerial act but a substantive requirement. The requirement is referable to the need to ensure that all members of the tribunal have had an …

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has observed that it is no longer res integra that while dealing with the objections under Section 34, a court does not sit in appeal over the arbitral award. The court observed that under Section 35, an award can be set aside only if the petitioner establishes that the parties …

Fraudulent Initiation Of CIRP Can Be Set Aside By NCLAT While Hearing Appeal U/S 61: NCLAT New Delhi
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Fraudulent Initiation Of CIRP Can Be Set Aside By NCLAT While Hearing Appeal U/S 61: NCLAT New Delhi

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain,Mr. Naresh Salecha and Mr. Indevar Pandey has held that fraudulent initiation of the CIRP can be set aside by the NCLT or as a corollary by NCLAT also as they have jurisdiction to decide whether any proceeding under the code has been initiated fraudulently or not. 3 who happened to …

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula, while hearing a writ petition challenging an arbitral award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, has held that invoking the writ jurisdiction to challenge an arbitral award would circumvent the statutory requirement of pre-deposit u/s 19 of the MSMED Act, and would amount to defeating the legislative intent. …

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court
Trending News
4 months, 1 week ago

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that de jure ineligibility to act as an arbitrator can only be waived, after dispute having arisen, by the parties by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12 of the Arbitration Act. The court referred to the Delhi High Court judgment in Reliance Infrastructure Limited v. Madhyanchal …

NCLAT Delhi: Section 95(1) Of IBC Permits Creditors To Initiate Insolvency Proceedings Against Personal Guarantors Via A Resolution Professional
9 months ago

NCLAT Delhi: Section 95(1) Of IBC Permits Creditors To Initiate Insolvency Proceedings Against Personal Guarantors Via A Resolution Professional

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Delhi bench, comprising Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Arun Baroka held that Section 95 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy, Code, 2016 allows creditors to initiate insolvency process against a Personal Guarantor through a Resolution Professional. Contention of the Appellant: The Appellant argued that since the default occurred on 04.03.2016, the Section 95 application filed …

IBC Cases Quarterly Digest : January To March 2024
11 months, 1 week ago

IBC Cases Quarterly Digest : January To March 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: Ansal Crown Heights Flat Buyers Association V M/S. : Company Appeal No.231 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra, has held that the Corporate Debtor cannot be absolved from its liability to discharge its Operational debt by the Insurance Company's payment to the Operational Creditor …

NCLT Kolkata: Provisional Attachment Order Under PMLA Won't Bar Admission Of CIRP Against Corporate Debtor Under IBC
11 months, 2 weeks ago

NCLT Kolkata: Provisional Attachment Order Under PMLA Won't Bar Admission Of CIRP Against Corporate Debtor Under IBC

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal Kolkata, comprising Smt. Bidisha Banerjee, and Shri D. Arvind held that the Provisional Attachment Order under PMLA will not bar the admission of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process proceedings against the Corporate Debtor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. NCLT Verdict: The NCLT Kolkata allowed the CIRP application and held that the Provisional Attachment Order …

NCLT Kolkata: IBC Prevails Over State Financial Corporation Act, 1951
1 year ago

NCLT Kolkata: IBC Prevails Over State Financial Corporation Act, 1951

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal Kolkata, comprising Justice Ms. Bidisha Banerjee and Shri Arvind Devanathan held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 prevails over State Financial Corporation Act, 1951. Mr. Rajesh Lahila was appointed as the Resolution Professional on 17.02.2022 to manage the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor and to take custody of all the assets of the Corporate …

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition
1 year ago

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that non filing of the arbitral award along with the Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a fatal defect, making such filing as non-est. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court and filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration …

Monthly Digest Of IBC Cases: February 2024
1 year ago

Monthly Digest Of IBC Cases: February 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority Versus Prabhjit Singh Soni & Anr. : Company Appeal No.82 of 2024 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal New Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mitra, and Mr. Arun Baroka held that the Adjudicating Authority ought to have granted an exclusion/extension of time when the Resolution Plan received in the …

NCLT Kolkata: Simultaneous CIRP Can Be Initiated Against Principal Borrower And Corporate Guarantor
1 year, 1 month ago

NCLT Kolkata: Simultaneous CIRP Can Be Initiated Against Principal Borrower And Corporate Guarantor

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal Kolkata comprising Smt. NCLT Verdict: The NCLT Kolkata admitted the CIRP application and held that a simultaneous CIRP can be initiated against Principal Borrower and Corporate Guarantor under IBC. In cases where the corporate person had offered guarantee in respect of loan transaction, the right of the financial creditor to initiate action against such entity …

NCLAT Delhi: Benefit Under Section 17 Of Limitation Act Is Not Available When Fraud Was Played In Creditor Company And Not In Company Of Corporate Debtor
1 year, 4 months ago

NCLAT Delhi: Benefit Under Section 17 Of Limitation Act Is Not Available When Fraud Was Played In Creditor Company And Not In Company Of Corporate Debtor

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr Barun Mitra and Mr Arun Baroka has rejected an appeal and held that benefits under Section 17 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for filing a belated claim is not available when the fraud was played in the Creditor Company and not in the company of the …

NCLT Kochi: Moratorium U/S 96 And 101 Of IBC Cannot Be Meant To Prohibit The Right To Action U/S 7, 9 Or 10 Of IBC
1 year, 4 months ago

NCLT Kochi: Moratorium U/S 96 And 101 Of IBC Cannot Be Meant To Prohibit The Right To Action U/S 7, 9 Or 10 Of IBC

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench, comprising of Justice T Krishna Valli and Shri. Shyam Babu Gautam dismissed a stay application and has held that the moratorium under sections 96 and 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code “ cannot be meant to prohibit the right to action under sections 7, 9 or 10 of IBC as it lies …

NCLAT New Delhi: Jurisdiction Of NCLT Under IBC Is Summary In Nature, Not Extensive As A Civil Court To Enquire Into Disputes
1 year, 4 months ago

NCLAT New Delhi: Jurisdiction Of NCLT Under IBC Is Summary In Nature, Not Extensive As A Civil Court To Enquire Into Disputes

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi comprising of Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra dismissed an appeal filed by Vistra ITCL Ltd.. It held that the scope and jurisdiction of National Company Law Tribunal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 being summary in nature is distinctly not as extensive as that of a …

NCLAT Chennai: Grounds Not Taken On Jurisdiction Before Cannot Be Contested Afresh On Appeal When The Parties Accepted The Jurisdiction In NCLT
1 year, 4 months ago

NCLAT Chennai: Grounds Not Taken On Jurisdiction Before Cannot Be Contested Afresh On Appeal When The Parties Accepted The Jurisdiction In NCLT

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench comprising of Justice M. Venugopal and Shreesha Merla dismissed the appeal filed by Jitendra Virmani against the National Company Law Tribunal Bangalore order dated 27.11.2019. The Appellate Tribunal held that the grounds not taken on jurisdiction before the NCLT, cannot be contested afresh on appeal as the parties have exercised acquiescence and …

Must Be Wary Of Unnecessary Judicial Interference At Every Stage Of Arbitral Process: Calcutta HC Upholds Arbitral Award In Favor Of Reliance Infra
1 year, 5 months ago

Must Be Wary Of Unnecessary Judicial Interference At Every Stage Of Arbitral Process: Calcutta HC Upholds Arbitral Award In Favor Of Reliance Infra

Live Law  

In a landmark 255-page judgement, the Calcutta High Court has upheld an arbitral award in favor of Reliance Infrastructure, arising out of a deal struck with the Damodar Valley Corporation for construction of thermal power plants in Raghunathpur. Thereafter, the DVC decided to challenge the Award and filed a Section 34 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in …

NCLAT New Delhi: No Point In Discussing An Issue, Even If Issue Is Attractive, After The Closure Of CIRP Proceedings
1 year, 5 months ago

NCLAT New Delhi: No Point In Discussing An Issue, Even If Issue Is Attractive, After The Closure Of CIRP Proceedings

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain and Naresh Salecha, dismissed the appeal filed in State Bank of India vs. Ritesh Prakash Adatiya & Ors. The appeal was filed against the order dated 29.03.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal Kolkata whereby an application by the IRP of McLeod Russel …

NCLT Bangalore: Interest And Cost Imposed By Commercial Court Post Initiation Of CIRP Not To Be Admitted
1 year, 5 months ago

NCLT Bangalore: Interest And Cost Imposed By Commercial Court Post Initiation Of CIRP Not To Be Admitted

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal, Bangalore Bench comprising of Justice T. Krishnavalli and Shri. The Tribunal held that the claim against additional cost and interest imposed by the Commercial Court post the commencement of CIRP cannot be admitted by the RP in a CIRP during the moratorium period. The RP contended that that the Applicant’s claim was based on the …

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 11th To 17th September 2023
1 year, 6 months ago

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 11th To 17th September 2023

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited & Anr. V Jagannath Sponge Private Limited Citation: 2023 LiveLaw 788 The Supreme Court has held that under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, once the Resolution Plan stands approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, the Electricity Department cannot demand payment of arrears, which were payable by the Corporate …

NCLT Hyderabad: NCLT Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Condone Delay Under Section 42 Of IBC When There Is A Clear Statutory Bar
1 year, 6 months ago

NCLT Hyderabad: NCLT Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Condone Delay Under Section 42 Of IBC When There Is A Clear Statutory Bar

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad comprising of Justice Smt. The Tribunal held that it cannot exercise its inherent powers to condone delay when there is a clear statutory bar in entertaining an appeal filed beyond the period prescribed under the Code. Contentions of the Liquidator: The Liquidator relied upon the Supreme Court case of National Spot Exchange Ltd. vs. …

Arbitral Award Passed By MSEF Council Without Deciding Issue Of Jurisdiction Liable To Be Set Aside: Orissa High Court
1 year, 6 months ago

Arbitral Award Passed By MSEF Council Without Deciding Issue Of Jurisdiction Liable To Be Set Aside: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Orrissa held that an arbitral award passed by the MSEF Council without deciding the Section 16 application filed by the buyer challenging its jurisdiction is liable to be set aside. Contention of the Parties The appellant challenged the impugned judgment on the following grounds: The Learned District Judge went beyond the scope of his powers as …

Award Against Guarantor Who Is Not Member Of Multi State Co-Op Society, Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Award Against Guarantor Who Is Not Member Of Multi State Co-Op Society, Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has set aside an award passed pursuant to an arbitral reference made under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, since the award debtor was not a member of the Co-operative Society. The petitioner challenged that arbitral award by filing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the Bombay …

NCLT Cannot Coerce Allottees Into Settlements
2 years, 7 months ago

NCLT Cannot Coerce Allottees Into Settlements

Live Law  

The jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and the courses of action available to these authorities under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been defined and limited by the Hon'ble Supreme Court through its recent judgment in E. S. Krishnamurthy & Others v. Bharath Hi Tech Builders Pvt. …

Threshold Of Rs.1 Crore Is Required For Initiation of CIRP, Even If The Cause Of Action Arises Out Of Failure Of The Consent Terms Of The Earlier Section 7 Application: NCLAT
2 years, 10 months ago

Threshold Of Rs.1 Crore Is Required For Initiation of CIRP, Even If The Cause Of Action Arises Out Of Failure Of The Consent Terms Of The Earlier Section 7 Application: NCLAT

Live Law  

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal bench comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Ms. Shreesha Merla in the case of Prafulla Purushottamrao Gadge v. Narayan Mangal held that an application filed after 24.03.2020 under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 below the threshold of Rs. Brief Facts The Financial Creditor filed an application under Section 7 of IBC …

Inordinate And Unexplained Delay In Rendering Arbitral Award Is Against Public Policy Of India: Delhi High Court
2 years, 10 months ago

Inordinate And Unexplained Delay In Rendering Arbitral Award Is Against Public Policy Of India: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that inordinate and unexplained delay in rendering the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India and is amenable to challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner filed a petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act against the arbitral award before the Delhi High …

CIRP Can Be Initiated Based On An Unchallenged Arbitral Award: NCLT Kolkata
2 years, 11 months ago

CIRP Can Be Initiated Based On An Unchallenged Arbitral Award: NCLT Kolkata

Live Law  

The NCLT Kolkata Bench comprising of Shri Rajasekhar V.K. Thereafter, a petition under Section 9 of the IBC was filed before the Adjudicating Authority on 29.07.2021 by the Operational Creditor, seeking initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor for defaulting on payment of Rs.12,28,74,980.61/-. On 27.08.2020 the Arbitral Tribunal, after hearing the contentions of the parties, passed an arbitral award …

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside Merely On The Ground Of Erroneous Application Of Law Or Misappreciation Of Evidence : Supreme Court
2 years, 11 months ago

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside Merely On The Ground Of Erroneous Application Of Law Or Misappreciation Of Evidence : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, held that apart from the grounds mentioned in Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 2013, an arbitral award can be set aside only when it is vitiated by patent illegality, and not on ground of erroneous application of law or by misappreciation of evidence. A Bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna …

Order XXIII Rule 1(4) CPC Not Applicable To Application Challenging Arbitral Award U/S 34 Arbitration & Conciliation Act: Patna High Court
3 years, 1 month ago

Order XXIII Rule 1(4) CPC Not Applicable To Application Challenging Arbitral Award U/S 34 Arbitration & Conciliation Act: Patna High Court

Live Law  

The Patna High Court has held that an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award is not a suit. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha rejected the petitioner's argument that liberty to file a fresh application was not sought by the Respondent while withdrawing its earlier application, and observed, "As per Section 19 …

Will Arbitral Award-Holder's Claim Be Extinguished On Approval Of Award-Debtor's Resolution Plan Under IBC? Yes, Rules Calcutta High Court
3 years, 10 months ago

Will Arbitral Award-Holder's Claim Be Extinguished On Approval Of Award-Debtor's Resolution Plan Under IBC? Yes, Rules Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

On Friday, the Calcutta High Court settled an important question of arbitration law, viz., whether an arbitral award-holder's claim would stand extinguished upon the approval of a Resolution Plan for the award-debtor's revival, when it was not pressed during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. Relying on Supreme Court rulings from 2020, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya ruled that the claim would get …

Imposition Of Pre CIRP Moratorium: Icing On The Cake
5 years, 6 months ago

Imposition Of Pre CIRP Moratorium: Icing On The Cake

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal while adjudicating the matter of NUIPulp and Paper Industries Private Limited v. Ms Roxcel Trading GMBH, upheld the viewpoint of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, wherein, moratorium was imposed on the Corporate Debtor as per section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 before the commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process. Therefore, an …

Limitation Period For Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Begins From Date Of Disposal Of Application To Correct The Award: SC [Read Order]
6 years, 7 months ago

Limitation Period For Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Begins From Date Of Disposal Of Application To Correct The Award: SC [Read Order]

Live Law  

‘Section 34 specifically speaks of the date on which a request under Section 33 has been “disposed of” by the Arbitral Tribunal. We are also of the view that a “disposal” of the application can be either by allowing it or dismissing it.’The Supreme Court has made it clear that the limitation period to make application to set aside arbitral …

Limitation Period For Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Begins From Date Of Disposal Of Application To Correct The Award: SC [Read Order]
6 years, 7 months ago

Limitation Period For Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Begins From Date Of Disposal Of Application To Correct The Award: SC [Read Order]

Live Law  

‘Section 34 specifically speaks of the date on which a request under Section 33 has been “disposed of” by the Arbitral Tribunal. We are also of the view that a “disposal” of the application can be either by allowing it or dismissing it.’The Supreme Court has made it clear that the limitation period to make application to set aside arbitral …

Discover Related