NCLAT

In Orris Infrastructure v. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, the Supreme Court holds that an IBC Section 9 admission induced by fraud can be recalled, yet the CIRP need not automatically end.

The Supreme Court declined to stay the Adani group’s insolvency resolution plan, emphasizing adherence to CIRP timelines and directing NCLAT to prioritize Vedanta’s appeal.

In a key NCLAT insolvency deposit default ruling, the appellate tribunal held that companies cannot evade insolvency proceedings by relying on their own violation of deposit rules under company law.

The NCLAT has clarified that disputed contractual debts in insolvency cannot be recovered through summary proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, reaffirming the limits of liquidator powers.

In a significant clarification of India’s insolvency framework, the NCLAT has ruled that an RBI regulated financial services company cannot be treated as a “corporate debtor” under the IBC unless the central bank cancels its registration. The decision, delivered in the Jumbo Finvest case, draws a clear line between financial sector regulation and the corporate insolvency process.

NCLAT affirms that a pre-existing dispute bars insolvency action against Voltas, reinforcing that the IBC cannot be misused as a debt-recovery tool. The tribunal highlights documentation gaps, commercial disputes, and Mobilox principles to dismiss the Section 9 petition.

On November 4, 2025, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) delivered a landmark ruling in the ongoing battle between WhatsApp, Meta Platforms Inc., and the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The tribunal overturned the CCI’s earlier order prohibiting WhatsApp from implementing its data-sharing policy with Facebook and Instagram, holding that the regulator had not adequately justified the ban. However, NCLAT simultaneously upheld the ₹213.5 crore penalty imposed on Meta for...

The NCLAT upheld Nuvoco’s ₹1,800 crore takeover of Vadraj Cement, rejecting employee objections and reaffirming the primacy of CoC’s commercial wisdom under the IBC. The ruling clears hurdles for resolution and strengthens predictability in India’s insolvency regime.

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has ruled that a Look-Out Circular (LOC) cannot be issued mechanically against a personal guarantor to a corporate debtor. In Ramesh Jain v. State Bank of India, the tribunal held that the creditor must provide specific, credible reasons to believe the guarantor is a flight risk. This decision safeguards the guarantor's fundamental right to travel abroad and prevents LOCs from being used as a tool for harassment by financial creditors.