Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Supreme Court Upholds Strict Timelines for Claims in Insolvency Cases, Cautions Against Reopening Undecided Claims

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, in a judgment delivered on September 11, 2023, upheld the strict timelines for the inclusion of claims in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) cases, cautioning against reopening claims after the approval of resolution plans. The judgment, authored by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, carried far-reaching implications for insolvency proceedings, emphasizing the importance of adherence to established procedures.

The case, M/s. RPS Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Mukul Kumar & Anr., revolved around the inclusion of a belated claim in the CIRP of a Corporate Debtor. The appellant sought to include a claim related to an arbitral award, which was in appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act. The Corporate Debtor had initiated the CIRP process for several real estate projects, and a resolution plan had already been approved by the Committee of Creditors (COC).

In a key observation, the Supreme Court highlighted the significance of timeliness in the insolvency process, stating, “The IBC is a time-bound process... Allowing claims after the resolution plan has been accepted by the COC would result in the reopening of the whole issue, particularly as there may be other similar persons who may jump onto the bandwagon.”

The Court emphasized that the Corporate Debtor had followed due procedures, including making public announcements regarding the CIRP through newspapers, which constituted deemed knowledge for all concerned parties. The appellant’s plea of not being aware of these announcements was deemed untenable in a commercial context.

The judgment also referred to earlier decisions, including the Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited case, where the Court had cautioned against entertaining claims after the acceptance of a resolution plan.

Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. The judgment reiterates the significance of timely adherence to insolvency procedures and the potential consequences of reopening unresolved claims, providing valuable guidance for future insolvency cases.

Date of Decision: September 11, 2023

M/s. RPS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. vs MUKUL KUMAR & ANR.     

                                

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/11-Sep-2023_RPS_Infrastructure_Vs_Mukul.pdf"]

Latest Legal News