BATCH 2019-24

SYNOPSIS:

SUBJECT: Law on Insolvency and Bankruptcy code

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

DR. RAHUL NIKAM MUDIT BALIA

Associate Professor ROLL NO.- 92121040003

Faculty of law, B.A. LL.B (Hons.)

Marwadi University IX Semester

 CASE ANALYSIS

1. Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. V SEBI - The Case dealt with
Whether SEBI has jurisdiction to initiate proceedings against the company when
a moratorium is imposed under Section 14 of IBC.
2. Essar Steel India Limited v. Satish Kumar Gupta and Others- Essar Steel
was one of India's largest steel manufacturers. Its overdue debt of about INR
55,000 crore was the largest among the companies being resolved under the IBC.
Pursuant to the IBC process, a joint venture between Arcelor Mittal and Nippon
Steel acquired Essar Steel in December 2019. The proceedings under the IBC in
relation to the acquisition of Essar Steel lasted for more than two years and laid
down precedents on several questions arising out of the then newly introduced
insolvency legislation in India.

3. M/S Shilpi Cable Technologies Ltd. V. Macquarie Bank Ltd.- The court in
M/S Shilpi Cable Technologies Ltd. vs. Macquarie Bank Ltd. interpreted various
provisions constituted under section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
2016. Further section 9 of the code deals with the application of the initiation of
the insolvency process against corporate debtor being filled by the Operational
creditor as prescribed by the Act.
4. K Kishan v. M/s Vijay Nirman Company Private Ltd.- An arbitral award
dated January 21, 2017 was passed in favour of M/s Vijay Nirman Company
Private Limited (“Respondent”) for payment of certain sum of money by one M/s
Ksheerabad Constructions Private Limited (“KCPL”). On February 6, 2017, a
notice was issued by the Respondent to KCPL under section 8 of the IBC. The
said notice was disputed on the grounds that the said amount was the subject-
matter of an arbitration proceeding. Subsequently, on April 20, 2017, a petition
was filed by KCPL under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 (“Arbitration Act”) challenging the aforesaid arbitral award.