Our firm has beeninvolved in several high value and complex corporate restructuring, debt recovery and Insolvency related litigation across industry Sectors such as Textiles, Power, Manufacturing, Steel, Pharmaceuticals, Logistics, Retail, Infrastructure and has a proven track record of restructuring underperforming/distressed companies across various Forums such as Debt Recovery Tribunals, National Company Law Tribunals, High Courts etc.
Our firm has been actively working with MSME’s in resolution of Debts by way of Restructuring of loans, Initiating Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) through National Company Law Tribunal. Our clients include lenders and investors at all levels of the capital structure, defaulting companies, promotors / directors, financial and operational creditors, Creditor Committees (COC), insolvency professionals, liquidators, stakeholders committees, trustees and government institutions.
Our recent success stories include providing legal support to Personal Guarantors of Corporate Debtors so as to help them navigate Section 95 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and obtain relief through National Company Law Tribunal.
We have a high success rate contesting cases under section 14, Section 17& 19 of SARFAESI Act at Debt Recovery Tribunals and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals, High Courts Etc.
Our bankruptcy and insolvency litigation practice team represents both creditors (financial as well as operational) and debtors and we have a high success rate in closing cases contested/filed under Sections 7, 9, 29a and 54 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code at National Company Law Tribunals across India, National Company Law Appellate Tribunals at Chennai and Delhi , High Courts and Supreme Court.
Date Of Article : 02/03/2023
Supreme Court in the matter of Bank of Baroda v. MBL Infrastructures Ltd. (supra), where Hon’ble Supreme Court, while reiterating its earlier pronouncements, held that the provisions of Section 29-A continue to permeate section 31(1)(f) which is applicable during the liquidation process and that section 29-A has been enacted to facilitate corporate governance and in larger public interest
Date Of Article : 02/11/2023
Prosecution under Section 70 of IBC can only be initiated by IBBI or Central Government or person Authorised by Central Government. In the event of non-cooperation and non-provision of Information and any other offence committed by Suspended Promoters, Officials of Corporate Debtor, neither the Adjudicating Authority nor the Resolution professional can initiate prosecution under section 70 of IBC.
Date Of Article : 02/12/2023
TATA STEEL BSL LIMITED ..... Appellant versus VENUS RECRUITER PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS...... Respondents Delhi High Court. Key Take Aways:- 1) RP entitled to continue to prosecute suspended promoters of corporate Debtor under Section ,43-51 and 66 and 67 of IBC even after finalisation of Resolution plan of corporate Debtor and his fees will be decided by Adjudicating Authority. 2) Section 43-51, 66-67 of IB, largely endeavor to enhance the pool of assets of the corporate debtor available for either making it a lucrative prospect for a Resolution Applicant or in the event of liquidation, for distribution among creditors. The avoidance of these transactions essentially prevents unjust enrichment of one party at the expense of a Creditor. 3) Avoidance applications and CIRP are separate set of proceedings and adjudication of avoidance application is independent of resolution of Corporate Debtor and survives CIRP. 4) The Amount made available after transactions are avoided shall go solely to the Financial Creditors who have taken substantial haircuts and In accordance with Sections 44 to 51 of the IBC, 2016, the amount which is recovered can be distributed amongst the secure creditors in accordance with law as determined by the NCLT