- 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
SC dismisses SBI plea; refuses to vacate Delhi HC stay on IBC proceedings against Anil Ambani
After State Bank of India (SBI) approached the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court order, which had stayed the IBC proceedings against Anil Ambani in connection with the Rs. 1,200 crore loan disbursed by SBI to two of Ambani's firms, the Top Court refused to vacate the stay granted by the High Court on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) proceedings against Ambani.Last month,...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
After State Bank of India (SBI) approached the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court order, which had stayed the IBC proceedings against Anil Ambani in connection with the Rs. 1,200 crore loan disbursed by SBI to two of Ambani's firms, the Top Court refused to vacate the stay granted by the High Court on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) proceedings against Ambani.
Last month, the Delhi High Court had stayed the personal insolvency proceedings against Anil Ambani under Part III of the IBC and directed him to not transfer and dispose of any assets. SBI had invoked the personal guarantee that was furnished by Ambani.
A Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and S Ravindra Bhat declined to vacate the stay. However, the Court gave SBI the liberty to seek a modification of this stay order from the Delhi High Court and said that the matter may be taken up by the Delhi High Court on October 6.