The Appellate Tribunal held that a PRA who fails to submit a plan within time loses locus to challenge CoC decisions, and only timely, substantively relevant objections may be considered under Section 31 scrutiny.

IBBI’s Discussion Paper dated 17 November 2025 proposes sweeping reforms to strengthen CIRP transparency, including mandatory inclusion of allottees in the Information Memorandum, enhanced disclosure of receivables and attached assets, observer participation in CoC meetings, and mandatory reasoning when recommending liquidation despite viable plans.

NCLT Hyderabad clarified that foreign citizenship does not exempt a personal guarantor from IBC obligations. Deemed rejection of repayment plans under Section 115(2) allows initiation of bankruptcy proceedings under Section 121.

IBBI’s Circular dated 18 November 2025 introduces heightened due-diligence duties for Resolution Professionals under Section 29A of the IBC. The directive mandates strict verification of eligibility, documentation of findings, and compulsory placement of a detailed compliance note before the CoC, reinforcing transparency and reducing post-approval litigation in CIRP.

The Kerala High Court held that a pre-deposit under Section 18 SARFAESI cannot exceed the auction value of the concerned asset and that any reduction from the mandatory 50% threshold must be supported by written reasons.

The IBBI’s 17 November 2025 Discussion Paper proposes mandatory minimum shareholding requirements for directors and partners of Insolvency Professional Entities, aiming to strengthen governance, accountability, and professional independence across India’s insolvency ecosystem.

The Supreme Court ruled that Cumulative Redeemable Preference Shares (CRPS) issued in satisfaction of past dues are share capital and not financial debt, as their redemption is restricted under Section 55 of the Companies Act. With no default occurring, the CRPS holder lacked standing to initiate proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC.

The Supreme Court directed that a pending IBC appeal be transferred from the NCLAT Chennai Bench to the NCLAT Principal Bench to ensure fair adjudication, clarifying that allegations of attempted judicial influence would be addressed separately at the administrative level by the Chief Justice of India.

The NCLAT ruled that the statutory first charge created under Section 48 of the GVAT Act constitutes a security interest under the IBC, entitling the State Tax Department to priority distribution for undistributed amounts even after approval of the resolution plan.

The IBBI has proposed sweeping reforms to standardise valuation practices under the IBC, including uniform reporting formats, harmonised standards, recognition of intangibles and synergies, and a streamlined valuer appointment system.