Tag: liquidation

SARFAESI Act vs EPF Act: Supreme Court Says Provident Fund Charge Prevails Over Bank
9Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

SARFAESI Act vs EPF Act: Supreme Court Says Provident Fund Charge Prevails Over Bank

This Supreme Court judgment interprets the interplay between the priority of secured creditors under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act and the statutory first charge for provident fund dues under Section 11(2) of the EPF & MP Act. The Supreme Court held that the statutory first charge for provident fund contributions overrides the priority granted to secured creditors, even under a non-obstante clause in a later enactment. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Jalgaon District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., is a secured creditor which had advanced loans to a co-operative sugar society, secured by a mortgage and hypothecation of the society's assets. The sugar factory became defunct, leading to loan defaults. The bank initiated recovery under the SARFAESI Act, took possession o...
Read More
Arbitrator’s Power on Interest Rates: Supreme Court Explains Key Legal Limits
6Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Arbitrator’s Power on Interest Rates: Supreme Court Explains Key Legal Limits

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies the limited scope of judicial interference with arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Supreme Court held that an arbitrator's discretion to award a contractual interest rate of 24% is not per se usurious or against public policy. It reaffirmed that courts cannot reappreciate evidence and may only set aside an award on the narrow, specified grounds under Section 34 of the Act, which were not met in this case. Facts Of The Case: The appellants, M/s Sri Lakshmi Hotels Pvt. Limited and its Managing Director, availed two loans totaling ₹1.57 Crore from the respondent Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) in 2006. The loan agreements stipulated an interest rate of 24% per annum. After making partial repayments until April 200...
Read More
Investment vs. Debt: Supreme Court Explains Why Preference Shares Don’t Trigger IBC
13Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Investment vs. Debt: Supreme Court Explains Why Preference Shares Don’t Trigger IBC

The Supreme Court held that Cumulative Redeemable Preference Shares (CRPS) represent an equity investment, not a financial debt under the IBC. Preference shareholders are not creditors, and redemption is contingent upon company profits under the Companies Act. Therefore, they cannot initiate insolvency proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC for non-redemption. Facts Of The Case: EPC Constructions India Limited (EPCC) held outstanding receivables from Matix Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited for construction work. In 2015, to help Matix meet lender-mandated debt-equity ratios, the parties agreed to convert ₹400 crores of dues into 8% Cumulative Redeemable Preference Shares (CRPS). Matix subsequently allotted CRPS worth ₹250 crores to EPCC. When the shares matured after three years, M...
Read More
Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Backs Creditors & JSW, Shuts Door on Promoter Interference
22Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Backs Creditors & JSW, Shuts Door on Promoter Interference

This Supreme Court judgment reinforces the finality and binding nature of an approved resolution plan under the IBC. It held that claims not part of the Request for Resolution Plan (RfRP) or the final plan are extinguished, preventing "hydra-headed" post-approval claims. The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in approving the plan is paramount and not open to judicial review on merits. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (BPSL), initiated in 2017. JSW Steel Limited was selected as the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA), and its resolution plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and later by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in September 2019. However,...
Read More
Homebuyer Alert: Supreme Court Clarifies When a Real Estate Investment Becomes “Speculative”
2Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Homebuyer Alert: Supreme Court Clarifies When a Real Estate Investment Becomes “Speculative”

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies the distinction between genuine homebuyers and speculative investors under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It holds that allottees with agreements structured for assured returns or buy-back clauses, without a genuine intent to possess the property, are speculative investors. Such investors are barred from initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Section 7 of the IBC, as the Code is not a recovery mechanism for speculative investments. Facts Of The Case: This case consolidates four civil appeals concerning the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against real estate developers by individual allottees. The primary appellant, Mansi Brar Fernandes, entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Gay...
Read More
Who Pays for Unpaid Power Bills? Supreme Court Explains ‘Regulatory Asset’ Mess and Orders a Fix
6Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Who Pays for Unpaid Power Bills? Supreme Court Explains ‘Regulatory Asset’ Mess and Orders a Fix

The Supreme Court ruled that Regulatory Assets, while a valid regulatory tool, must be created only in exceptional circumstances and liquidated in a time-bound manner. It upheld the legal framework under the Electricity Act, 2003, and directed strict adherence to the newly inserted Rule 23 of the Electricity Rules, which mandates a maximum 3% gap in revenue and a 7-year liquidation period for existing assets. The judgment emphasizes the duty of Regulatory Commissions to ensure cost-reflective tariffs and affirms APTEL's power under Section 121 to issue directions against regulatory failure. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from petitions and appeals filed by three private power distribution companies (Discoms) in Delhi—BSES Rajdhani, BSES Yamuna, and Tata Power Delhi—agains...
Read More
Supreme Court Rules Property Can Be Returned During Insolvency If Not Needed
6Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules Property Can Be Returned During Insolvency If Not Needed

This Supreme Court judgment affirms the paramountcy of the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It clarifies that the moratorium under Section 14(1)(d) does not bar the return of possession of a corporate debtor's leased asset when such a decision is a conscious business choice made by the CoC and the Resolution Professional to alleviate a financial burden on the estate. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a dispute over the possession of a property leased by Nandini Impex Private Limited, the corporate debtor. The appellants had provided loans to the company, secured by the title deeds of the property's front and rear portions. Following a default, the property was conveyed to the appellants through separate deeds ...
Read More