Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Supreme Court Holds Secured Creditors Entitled to Rights and Protections in Insolvency Resolution Plans

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India has provided a solution to a tricky legal issue related to the rights of secured creditors in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The case pertains to the resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) for the insolvent Corporate Debtor, Amtek Auto Ltd., which led to the dilution of the pledge agreement between the corporate debtor and one of its secured creditors, Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd. The Supreme Court held that Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd. should be treated as a secured creditor and be entitled to all the rights and obligations applicable to a secured creditor under Sections 52 and 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).

The Court examined the amended Section 30(2) of the IBC, which requires the resolution plan to protect the interests of operational creditors and financial creditors who have not voted in favour of the plan. It also noted that the existing precedents did not provide a clear solution to the issue of a secured creditor who is not a financial creditor or operational creditor.

The Court provided two options to address the issue. The first was to treat the secured creditor as a financial creditor to the extent of the estimated value of the pledged share on the date of commencement of the CIRP, and give it voting rights. However, this would require a reconsideration of the existing precedents. The second option was to treat the secured creditor as a secured creditor in terms of Section 52 read with Section 53 of the IBC, and give it the option to retain the security interest in the pledged shares and receive the sale proceeds in accordance with Rule 21-A of the Liquidation Process Regulations.

The Court clarified that the resolution plan approved by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) would not be affected by its decision. It also rejected the argument of the respondents that the appellant had not objected to the earlier resolution plan and had acquiesced to its non-classification as a financial creditor in the CoC.

  Date of Decision: May 4, 2023                                                              

M/S VISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LTD & ORS.   vs DINKAR VENKATASUBRAMANIAN

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/04-May-2023-VISTRA-ITCL-INDIA-LIMITED-VS-VISTARA-ITCL.pdf"]

Latest Legal News