rashib

Question of law: – Invoking of Arbitration Clause after compromise decree Sec 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an Arbitration Agreement. According to this clause the parties in case of any dispute arising between the parties, the parties can take the matter directly before the …

Zenith Drugs & Allied Agencies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd Read More »

Question of law: – Amalgamation of Seat and Venue The seat of arbitration has been described as the “juridical home” of the arbitration and the choice of seat generally determines which courts have jurisdiction to consider challenges to arbitral awards, appoint arbitrators and otherwise exercise judicial supervision over arbitral proceedings. The seat of an arbitration …

Brahmani River Pellets Limited v. Kamachi Industries Limited Read More »

(Writ Petition (Civil), 43 of 2019, Judgment Date: Aug 09, 2019) Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure (Builders) had filed a plea in the Supreme Court in January 2019 challenging the constitutional validity of section 5 (8) (f) of the IBC 2016 under which homebuyers were conferred the right of financial creditors.   Question of law: Amendment made in IBC …

Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Limited & Anr. versus Union of India & Ors. Read More »

Writ Petition (Civil) NO. 99 OF 2018, Judgment on 25th January 2019) In this case, SC has settled the challenges which mounting against the constitutional validity of the Code. The key implications of the Supreme Court judgement are as follows: (a) The distinction between promoters / management and the corporate debtor has been judicially recognised. …

Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. versus Union of India & Ors. Read More »

(Writ Petition (Civil) NO 744 OF 2017, Judgment on 9th August 2018) Question of law: – Re-commencing of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Homebuyers main grievance was that despite being vital stakeholders they had no locus in the CIRP, therefore the provisions of the IBC should be declared ultra vires. They also wanted equal status as financial creditors …

Chitra Sharma & Ors. Versus Union of India and Ors. Read More »

(Civil Appeal NO. 8400 of 2017, Judgment on 19th September 2017) In this judgment, SC put an end to the dilemma of timelines with respect to various actions to be undertaken under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code “IB Code”, at the time of admission of application filed under 7, 9 and 10 of I B …

M/s. Surendra Trading Company Versus Juggilal Kamlapat Jute Mills Company Limited and Others Read More »

(Civil Appeal No. 15135 of 2017, decided on December 15, 2017) In this judgment, SC interpreted certain sections of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) in a favourable manner for foreign operational creditors. Facts: – Certain amounts became due from the Respondent, Shilpi Cable Technologies Ltd. (“Shilpi Cable”) to Macquarie Bank, which gave rise …

Macquarie Bank Limited Versus Shilpi Cable Technologies Limited Read More »

Question of law: – Can Corporate Debtor (erstwhile director) maintain appeal? In this case, SC delivered its first extensive ruling on the operation and functioning of the Insolvency Code. The ruling has its genesis in an application filed by ICICI Bank Limited (ICICI) before the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai (NCLT) to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process …

M/S. Innoventive Industries Limited Versus ICICI Bank & Anr. (CIVIL APPEAL No. 8337-8338 OF 2017, Judgment on 31st August 2017) Read More »

Question of law: – What constitutes “existence of a dispute” in the context of applications filed by operational creditors for initiation of CIRP of corporate debtors under the IBC, 2016. Supreme Court held:- Interpreting the expression “existence of a dispute” occurring in Section 8(2)(a) of the IBC, the Supreme Court allowed Mobilox’s appeal holding that …

Mobilox Innovations Private Limited Versus Kirusa Software Private Limited (CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9405 OF 2017, Judgment on 21st September 2017) Read More »

[ITA No. 325/2005, decided on 20th April, 2018] The Delhi High Court in the case of M/s Hilton Roulunds Ltd. versus Commissioner of Income Tax, while deciding the nature of the expenditure made for the exclusive use of the trademark as ‘Revenue Expenditure’, determined the fundamental test as to whether a trademark has been licensed …

M/s Hilton Roulunds Ltd. versus Commissioner of Income Tax Read More »