Posts

Showing posts from 2017

Whether NCLT order under IBC can be set aside – Due to Settlement

Whether NCLT order under IBC can be set aside – Due to Settlement Short Summary: In this flash tabloid, the writer initiates by speak of the provisions of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereafter referred as “I&B Code”) in relation to Power of NCLT OR NCLAT to set aside order after settlement between both the parties. The main drive of the broadsheet, on the other hand, is upon the “ Whether order of admission of application u/s 9 or 7 issued by Hon’ble NCLT can be set aside by settlement between both the parties?” This is article no. 295 of the series of editorials written by the author on corporate laws {Including Companies Act, 2013, SEBI, RBI Regulations, IBC, LLP Act, 2008 etc.}. Introduction: While two parties litigate out their dispute before a court of law, there is always a possibility that a mutual settlement may be arrived at during the course of proceedings. There may also be a case that the parties were already negotiating for se

Whether POA Holder can file Application under I & B Code, 2016

Whether POA Holder can file Application under I & B Code, 2016 Short Summary: In this flash tabloid, the writer initiates by speak of the provisions of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereafter referred as “I&B Code”) in relation to Overriding effect of I&B Code, 2016 over Power of Attorney Act, 1882. The main drive of the broadsheet, on the other hand, is upon the “ Whether Application u/s 9 can be sign by the Power of Attorney Holder” This is article no. 294 of the series of editorials written by the author on corporate laws {Including Companies Act, 2013, SEBI, RBI Regulations, IBC, LLP Act, 2008 etc.}. In this editorial author discuss the provisions over riding effect of I&B Code, 2016 on Power of Attorney Act, 1882 and landmark judgement delivered by NCLAT, in case Steam Shriram EPC Limited Vs. Rio Glass Solar SA  & T Shivaraman V/s Rio Glass Solar SA   & Anr. Case element: Case Name Shriram EPC Limited

Time Period Under “ibc Mandatory or Re commendatory

Time Period Under “ ibc Mandatory or Re commendatory Short Summary: In this flash tabloid, the writer initiates by speak of the provisions of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereafter referred as “IBC”) in relation to power of IBC in respect of Time Limits. The main drive of the broadsheet, on the other hand, is upon the “Time Periods Mentioned under I&B Code, 2016 Whether Mandatory or Recommendatory?” This is article no. 293 of the series of editorials written by the author on corporate laws {Including Companies Act, 2013, SEBI, RBI Regulations, IBC, LLP Act, 2008 etc.}. Introduction: In this editorial author discuss the provisions under of I&B Code, 2016 in respect of different – 2 time limits mentioned under the Act i.e. ·          Section 12. (1) Subject to sub-section (2), the corporate insolvency resolution process shall be completed within a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of admission of the application to initiat