Telangana HC: Sine qua non for exercising power under sub section (1) of Section 5 is that the attaching authority must have reason to believe, which must be recorded in writing. The reason to believe must have a direct nexus or live link with the materials in possession pertaining to the above aspe...cts. Offence of money laundering is not an independent or autonomous offence but is dependent on commission of a predicate offence show more

AP High Court: When greater harm would be caused to the petitioner in case interim order is not granted and no loss is caused to the respondent if the interim order is passed, there shall be interim order restraining the respondent from giving effect to and operating the online ticketing solution fo...r ticketing as enacted under the impugned Act, Rules or under the impugned provisions show more

Bombay High Court: Clause stating liability to pay GST would be on the applicant cannot contemplate payment of interest on default in timely payment by the respondent and therefore liability of GST on such interest cannot be fastened on the applicant

Kolkata High Court: Where a specific time period has been mentioned in the scheme for making of application, a unit is required to comply the same in order to avail the benefits under the Scheme. The petitioners themselves are solely responsible for the delay in making such application and according...ly the unit ought not to be found fit for availing the subsidy as per the Scheme show more

P&H High Court: The businesses can fail for several reasons such as market conditions, labour unrest, lack of raw material, events like pandemic of Covid-19 etc.  and merely looking at the quantum of loss caused to a banker, it cannot be presumed that there was a fraud committed by the borr...ower/guarantor when no criminal case alleging fraud has even been filed against the borrower/guarantor. Accordingly, the action of the respondent Bank in seeking issuance of an LOC to prevent the petitioner from leaving the country on the ground that she was a guarantor to company’s loan is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India show more

Delhi High Court: The Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has been constituted as a forum whose jurisdiction may be invoked by any person aggrieved by a direction, decision or order made by the Authority or an Adjudicating Officer and Sections 43 and 44 of the Act do not confer, recognize or envisage any... original or plenary power or authority being exercised by the Appellate Tribunal. The injunction is not shown to have been preceded by any enquiry with respect to the validity of a particular project or even a prima facie assessment or evaluation of the validity of a single project and it does not even take note of a proven or evident violation of the provisions of the Act by a particular project. Accordingly orders dt. 17 November 2021 and 24 November 2021 issued by the Tribunal are set aside show more

Delhi High Court: Without the respondent establishing that it had suffered any loss whatsoever on account of the petitioner failing to close the transaction for purchase of the property, it would be impermissible for the respondent to forfeit the amount of ₹60,00,000/-, which admittedly is not a n...ominal amount, and constitutes substantial portion of the consideration show more

Supreme Court: Section 60(6) of the IBC contemplate exclusion of the entire period during which the moratorium was in force in respect of corporate debtor even in case of a suit or an application, at the instance of the corporate debtor

Kerala High Court – Leasehold rights given to the bank can be included in the liquidation estate of the corporate debtor. Writ petition is not maintainable where alternative remedy is available to the petitioner

Calcutta High Court - Where the banks have instituted the proceedings under the IBC code, writ petition objecting the classification of account as NPA is not maintainable as the authorities under the IBC code are competent to assess the correctness of the decision of the bank to treat the account of... the appellant as NPA and to recall the advances. show more

Delhi High Court:  When the exercise of discretion by the arbitrator is not seen to be arbitrary, capricious, irrational or perverse, there is no reason to interfere in the order made by the learned Sole Arbitrator

NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi - Mere common shareholding does not does not mean that the Respondent Companies are group Companies and that does not give any substantial grounds to the Appellant to seek substantive consolidation.

High Court, Bombay - The proceedings under section 138 of the NI Act would not fall within the purview of section 14 of the IBC Code

NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi - Adjudicating Authority having any doubt about details of person signing the notice, an opportunity should be given to the Appellant to explain and remove defects, if any, including details of authorization of person issuing notice.

NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi - There is no provision of review under the IBC and hence a misconceived review application cannot provide relaxation in limitation to the Appellant . This appeal was filed much after the expiry of the extended period of limitation without any cogent explanation of ...the delay in filing this appeal show more