- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
NCLAT rules on the additional report under IBC
NCLAT rules on the additional report under IBC
The tribunal advised the Adjudicating Authority to consider both the reports before taking any decision
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has held that the Resolution Professional (RP) can submit an additional report under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
The bench comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan, Dr. Alok Srivastava and Shreesha Merla was ruling on the case of Ramesh Chander Agarwala versus the State Bank of India.
The personal guarantors of a corporate debtor had filed an appeal under IBC before the NCLAT. This was against the December 2021 order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which appointed an RP without furnishing limited notice to the personal guarantors.
As per the rule, once the application is filed, the Adjudicating Authority (AA) has to act on it. Also, adhering to the principles, sufficient time is given to the personal guarantors to appear before the authorities. Thereafter the RP is appointed, who then submits the report. Finally, the adjudication of the application is decided by giving a proper hearing to the parties.
But the grievance of the personal guarantors was that the RP submitted the report without giving them enough time to respond to the notice.
NCLAT observed that though sufficient notice time was not issued, the personal guarantors still appeared before the AA. The tribunal, thus, permitted the personal guarantors to submit a representation to the RP. It advised that the RP then submit an additional report in continuation of his first report.
The tribunal further ruled that the AA should consider both reports before taking any decision under IBC.