Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI, NARASIMHA, J. B. PARDIWALA
BPTP Spacio Park Serene Flat Allottees Welfare Association (BAWA) – Appellant
Versus
Sudhanshu Tripathi, Director, BPTP Limited – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
1. RBCL Projects Private Limited, who was an Operational Creditor of BPTP Limited filed a petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016[“IBC”]. On 14 November 2022, the National Company Law Tribunal [“NCLT”] initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [“CIRP”].
2. The appellant is an association comprised of home buyers aggrieved by the non-delivery of possession of units by the Corporate Debtor. The appellant had instituted a consumer complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission[“NCDRC”] which ended in a consent order dated 22 October 2020. The appellant has instituted execution proceedings for enforcement of the order of the NCDRC.
3. Against the order of the NCLT dated 14 November 2022, both the appellant and the first respondent, who is an erstwhile Director, filed appeals
The court ruled that the NCLAT erred in approving a settlement without adhering to the procedural requirements of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, emphasizing the collective nature of insolvency p....
The court affirmed that once debt and default are established under Section 7 of the IBC, admission into CIRP is mandatory, preventing misuse of the process as merely a recovery mechanism.
A suit filed against a corporate debtor during the moratorium period under Section 14 of the IBC is invalid.
Unsubstantiated claims of pre-existing disputes do not impede the admission of an application under Section 9 of the IBC.
In considering interim relief, courts must weigh the risk of injustice if their decision ultimately runs counter to the course adopted at the time of granting or refusing such relief.
IBC is a time bound process – Plea of not being aware of newspaper pronouncements is not one which should be available to a commercial party.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article