Admission Order Of Application U/S 7 Of IBC Can Be Recalled If Fraud Or Malicious Intent Is Proved U/S 65 Of Code: NCLAT
2 months ago

Admission Order Of Application U/S 7 Of IBC Can Be Recalled If Fraud Or Malicious Intent Is Proved U/S 65 Of Code: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mita and Mr. Arun Baroka has held that when CIRP proceedings are initiated fraudulently or maliciously, the Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction under the IBC to consider the allegations of fraudulent and malicious initiation of CIRP proceedings in terms of Section 65 and recall the CIRP admission order. Since appeal against this order stood time barred, with a view to indirectly challenge the CIRP initiation order, the Respondent took recourse to file Section 65 application vide IA No. It further added that section 65 of the code empowers the Adjudicating Authority to ascertain whether the CIRP has been initiated fraudulently or maliciously even if the application has been admitted. The tribunal concluded that “when such fraudulent CIRP proceedings are initiated, the Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction under the IBC to consider the allegations of fraudulent and malicious initiation of CIRP proceedings in terms of Section 65 and recall the CIRP admission order.” Case Title: M/s Acute Daily Media Pvt.

Corporate Fraud Application Order Appellants Respondent Malicious Intent Filed Code Authority Malicious Ibc Section 7 Cirp Section 65 Omp Adjudicating Section 7 Application Cirp Proceedings  application  code  65  nclat  authority  ibc  filed  proved  intent  order  cirp  recalled  malicious  fraud  appellants  mr  adjudicating  corporate  respondent

History of this topic

Penalties U/S 65 Of IBC Can Be Imposed Against Those Who Fraudulently Initiate Insolvency Process: NCLAT
1 week, 2 days ago

Penalties U/S 65 Of IBC Can Be Imposed Against Those Who Fraudulently Initiate Insolvency Process: NCLAT

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Barun Mitra and Arun Baroka disposed an appeal filed by a majority shareholder of the corporate debtor stating that the Section 7 application filed by financial creditors was fraudulently filed in collusion with the corporate debtors' promoters. NCLAT Judgement The National Company Law Appellate …

Status Report Submitted In Criminal Proceeding Can Have No Bearing While Deciding Application U/S 7 Of IBC: NCLAT
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Status Report Submitted In Criminal Proceeding Can Have No Bearing While Deciding Application U/S 7 Of IBC: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Arun Baroka has held that Status Report submitted in a criminal proceeding regarding allegations of fraud and forgery can have no bearing while deciding Section 7 Application. Per contra, the respondent submitted that the debt and default being fully proved, Section 7 Application ought to have been admitted, which …

CIRP Withdrawal Cannot Be Allowed Unless Application Is Filed By Applicant Who Initiates Section 7 Application: NCLAT
2 months, 3 weeks ago

CIRP Withdrawal Cannot Be Allowed Unless Application Is Filed By Applicant Who Initiates Section 7 Application: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Barun Mitra has held that CIRP cannot be withdrawn under section 12A read with Regulation 30A unless application for withdrawal is filed by the applicant who initiated the CIRP. Based on the above, the tribunal observed that “we are of the view that Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error …

CIRP Withdrawal Cannot Be Allowed Unless Application Is Filed By Applicant Who Initiates S.7 Application: NCLAT
3 months ago

CIRP Withdrawal Cannot Be Allowed Unless Application Is Filed By Applicant Who Initiates S.7 Application: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Barun Mitra has held that CIRP cannot be withdrawn under section 12A read with Regulation 30A unless application for withdrawal is filed by the applicant who initiated the CIRP. Based on the above, the tribunal observed that “we are of the view that Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error …

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

Application U/S 7 Of IBC Cannot Be Admitted In Absence Of Debt And Default: NCLAT New Delhi
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Application U/S 7 Of IBC Cannot Be Admitted In Absence Of Debt And Default: NCLAT New Delhi

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra has held that application under section 7 of the IBC cannot be admitted in absence of any debt and consequent default on the part of the corporate debtor. Payments having already been received by Thakkars of the balance amount for payment to the Investors, there was no …

Once Plausibility Of Pre-Existing Dispute Is Established, Application U/S 9 Of IBC Must Be Rejected: NCLAT
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Once Plausibility Of Pre-Existing Dispute Is Established, Application U/S 9 Of IBC Must Be Rejected: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain, Barun Mitra and Indevar Pandey has held that IBC bestows only summary jurisdiction upon the Adjudicating Authority. It was further submitted that there is no genuine foundation of pre-existing dispute since all the pump sets were supplied after third party inspection which agency had certified the goods at the time …

Filing Petition U/S 10 Of IBC Subsequent To Action Taken Under SARFAESI Act Cannot Be Termed Malicious Or Fraudulent: NCLAT
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Filing Petition U/S 10 Of IBC Subsequent To Action Taken Under SARFAESI Act Cannot Be Termed Malicious Or Fraudulent: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Arun Baroka has held that merely because proceeding under Section 13, sub-section and of the SARFAESI Act has been initiated by the creditor prior to filing of Section 10 application, cannot be a ground to hold that Section 10 application is filed with malicious and fraudulent intent to be rejected …

NCLAT Chennai: Not Open To NCLT To Reject Withdrawl Application U/S 12A, Where 90% Voting Share Of CoC Exists
1 year, 5 months ago

NCLAT Chennai: Not Open To NCLT To Reject Withdrawl Application U/S 12A, Where 90% Voting Share Of CoC Exists

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench comprising of Justice M. Venugopal and Shreesha Merla dismissed the appeal filed in Mayuras Industrial Services vs. S R Shriraam Shekher & Anr. Background Facts: The RP had filed an application seeking an order of withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process resting upon the Resolution passed by the Committee of Creditors …

Discover Related