NCLAT held that CoC exclusively determines CIRP fees and expenses, and once approved, subsequent challenges are barred, reinforcing CoC’s autonomy under IBC.

NCLAT held that delay in implementing an approved resolution plan justifies PBG encashment and CIRP revival, reinforcing timely compliance as a core IBC mandate.

NCLAT held that a Section 7 IBC petition is invalid if based on a loan assignment that breaches RBI guidelines, rendering the financial debt claim unenforceable.

NCLAT held that after CIRP begins, withdrawal under Section 12A cannot rely on a settlement with a single creditor if other admitted claims exist, emphasising CoC’s supremacy.

NCLAT ruled that a Section 9 IBC petition is inadmissible if the default falls during the Section 10A bar period and recalculated claims fall below ₹1 crore; continuing CIRP after settlement is misuse.

Allahabad High Court upheld YEIDA’s statutory power to cancel land allotment, ruling that Section 14 of the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act overrides executed lease deeds and partial payment claims.

NCLT Hyderabad held that Section 7 IBC petition is not maintainable against a SEBI-registered stock broker, as such entities qualify as Financial Service Providers excluded from IBC.

NCLAT held that legal consultancy fee claims in CIRP must be supported by credible proof beyond invoices or engagement letters, as unsupported claims cannot be admitted under IBC.

NCLAT held that an SRA under the IBC has only procedural liberty, and not an enforceable right, to seek renewal of expired leases, as the decision to grant renewal lies exclusively with the State Government.

NCLAT ruled that interest on lease rent cannot be recovered as CIRP cost under the IBC without an express contractual clause, holding that unilateral invoice claims lack enforceability.