Back
N. NAGARESH
Jeny Thankachan, D/o Mr. M. R. Thankachan – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. NAGARESH, J.
The petitioner who is a sleeping partner in the 3rd respondent-Limited Liability Partnership Firm, seeks to declare that the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 shall have overriding effect over the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, since insolvency resolution and bankruptcy for individuals and Partnership Firms have come into force with effect from 15.11.2019 by virtue of Ext.P3 Notification.
2. The petitioner states that he holds 20% share in the 3rd respondent-Limited Liability Partnership as contemplated under Section 23(4) of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008. The petitioner submits that by virtue of Ext.P3 Government Order dated 15.11.2019, the provisions under Sections 78, 79 and 94 to 187 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC 2016) came into force with effect from 15.11.2019. In order to redress his grievances relating to the partnership, the petitioner initiated insolvency resolution process under Section 94 of the IBC 2016 before the adjudicating authority/National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench. According to the petitioner, the NCLT has accep
Section 14 of IBC 2016 relates to moratorium which will come into play in corporate Insolvency Resolution Processes initiated by Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors and by Corporate Applicants
A Personal Guarantor's application under Section 94 of the IBC is maintainable even when SARFAESI recovery proceedings are pending, provided the initiation is not a sham proceeding meant solely to ob....
The interim moratorium under Section 96 of the IBC does not apply to corporate debtor's properties, allowing SARFAESI actions against them while protecting only the personal guarantor's assets.
The DRT has jurisdiction to entertain applications against personal guarantors and Section 60(1) of the IBC cannot be read to confer exclusive jurisdiction only on the NCLT.
Section 94 IBC petition by personal guarantor admissible on proof of debt and default alone; no assessment of repayment capacity or assets required at admission stage; IRP role facilitative, not inve....
For Section 94 petitions by personal guarantors, admission requires only proof of default; no assessment of repayment capacity or assets needed at threshold stage; RP role facilitative, not investiga....
NCLT lacks power to extend PIRP moratorium beyond 180 days under S.101(1) IBC.
Interim moratorium under IBC Section 96 triggers upon registration of Section 95 petition after scrutiny, despite registry irregularities; binds Securitisation proceedings from that date irrespective....
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
