Category: Corporate Disputes

Typically, when disputes arise, parties often seek the court’s intervention to compel the other side to arrive at a settlement. In such cases, a party often obtains an intermediate relief in the proceedings and seeks to enforce compliance with the order. However, enforcing court orders, especially in civil disputes, can be full of challenges as parties may attempt to by-pass judicial directives. In India, one of the mechanisms for enforcing compliance with court orders and preserving judicial authority is through the invocation of contempt jurisdiction. This article seeks to delve into the efficacy of invoking the contempt jurisdiction of the relevant court in civil disputes within the Indian legal framework.

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is a crucial part of India’s economic and financial changes. It helps resolve situations where a corporate entity cannot pay its debts. The IBC sets rules to make sure this process is balanced, fair and effective. In order to avoid misuse, the IBC has laid down certain ‘thresholds’ for a proceeding to be initiated before the National Company Law Tribunal. Such a threshold helps focus on more important cases which are of economic importance. This way, it stops the system from getting too busy with a multitude of cases involving smaller issues and defaults. In this article, we will discuss a significant difference between the process for operational creditors, compared to financial creditors, for initiating proceedings despite having a common threshold limit under the IBC.

The Indian market has witnessed a surge in the number of distressed companies being dragged into insolvency. This is on account of past debts or other liabilities owed by the distressed company to its creditors, sureties and/or guarantors (Creditors). The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) provides the statutory regime for dealing with such insolvent businesses. While dealing with the entire process of insolvency, it also regulates certain types of transactions which could undermine the value of the assets available to Creditors. These transactions are known as ‘avoidable transactions’ i.e., preferential transactions, undervalued transactions, transactions defrauding creditors and extortionate credit transactions. In this article, we will be dealing specifically with ‘Preferential Transactions’.

A recurring point that we have emphasized in each discussion around commercial litigation is to always keep the end commercial objective in mind. Litigation should always be a means to achieve the desired end objective. In an Indian context, the end objective for most commercial disputes should be to achieve a favorable settlement.

This aspect of litigation is more critical than what a party may envisage it to be. While engaging in any kind of litigation one must be sensitive to the implication of events that occur outside court. One may not realize, but what transpires outside court could be used by either side to their advantage before

Introduction This article is in continuation to the series of earlier articles which deal with various aspects to bear in mind while seeking to litigate in India. In our past articles, we have discussed multiple key facets such as; the need to anticipate and strategize a dispute well in advance, the importance of facts

This article is in continuation of the earlier articles that discuss various aspects one must bear in mind while seeking to litigate before courts in India. As outlined in the earlier article, it is imperative for a business to anticipate a dispute well in advance and plan the best approach for it.