Dispute Resolution
key
dispute_resolution
URL
/expertise/dispute-resolution
NCLAT reiterates that a decree-holder cannot be treated as a financial creditor for triggering CIRP under IBC
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (NCLAT) in the case of Sh. Sushil Ansal Vs Ashok Tripathi and Ors, has reiterated that a decree-holder though covered under the definition of creditor under Section 3(10) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) would not fall within the class of financial creditors and therefore, a decree holder cannot initiate a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against a corporate debtor with an object to execute a decree.
Supreme Court reiterates suit to commence De Novo after return of plaint under order VII Rule 10 and 10a of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
By decision dated 5 August 2020 in M/s EXL Careers & Anr. vs. Frankfinn Aviation Services (P) Ltd. (CA No. 2904 of 2020), a three judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court resolved conflicting views in two of its earlier division bench judgments - ONGC vs. Modern Construction & Company(2014)1SCC648 (‘ONGC’) and Joginder Tuli vs. S. L. Bhatia (1997) 1 SCC 502 (‘Joginder Tuli’).
Kerala High Court explains procedural mechanism of lifting an encumbrance under Section 57 of The Transfer of Property Act, 1882
On 5 August 2020, the Kerala High Court (High Court), in its decision in MP Varghese v Annamma Yacob & Ors (MFA No 47/2020) (MP Varghese Case), explained with considerable clarity the procedural mechanism to lift an encumbrance from an immovable property under Section 57 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882 (TPA), which provision has till date been rarely espoused in reported judgments in India.