Corporate Law

On 25th November, 2015, Oravel Stays Private Limited (Oyo) entered into a term sheet with Zostel Hospitality Private Limited (Zostel), for acquiring its assets including property data, customer data, intellectual property rights, software etc. The term sheet explicitly stated in its preamble that it will not be binding. ......

Gambling in India faces a peculiar predicament. It's our worst kept secret. The blanket ban in India of any activity that constitutes 'gambling' has existed since the British-Era, and ironically, has not undergone significant modification since that century. ......

On May 21, 2021, the Apex Court of India, in the case of Lalit Kumar Jain vs. Union of India & Ors. , upheld the validity of the Centre's notification dated November 15, 2019, allowing banks to proceed against personal guarantors for recovery of loans given to a company under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) (“Notification”). ......

The Supreme Court has recently, in the case of The Chief Election Commissioner of India Vs. M.R Vijaybhaskar & Ors. ("Judgment"), reiterated the inalienable right of the media to report oral remarks of judges during the course of any hearing. A bench, led by Justice DY Chandrachud, comprehensively tackled this precarious question which had found its way to the Apex Court. ......

On April 4th, 2021, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (“IBBI”) notified the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2021 (“Ordinance”) that introduces the Pre-packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (“PPIRP”) for micro, small and medium entities (“MSMEs”). The Ordinance comes into effect from April 4th, 2021. ......

In a recent judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India ("Court") in Laxmi Pat Surana vs. Union Bank of India & Anr. , the Court has held that the principal borrower need not be a ‘corporate person’ for insolvency process to be initiated against a company which stood as its guarantor, under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC"). ......

The Supreme Court of India, recently, in the case of Tata Motors Limited vs. Antonio Paulo Vaz & Anr . held that when the relationship between a car manufacturer and a dealer is on a principal-to-principal basis, the former cannot be saddled with liability arising from the actions of the latter that led to sale of a defective car, unless the car manufacturer’s knowledge about such defects can be proved. ......

Recently, the Supreme Court in the decision of Arun Kumar Jagatramka v. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. & Anr (“Arun Kumar Decision”) examined the interplay between liquidation proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) and Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 (“Act”). The issue before the Supreme Court was to decide whether a person ineligible to submit resolution plan under Section 29A of the IBC is barred from proposing a scheme under Section 230 of the Act. ......

In a recent judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India ("Supreme Court") in the case of P. Mohanraj & Ors. Vs. M/S Shah Brothers Ispat Pvt. Ltd , it has been held that the declaration of a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC") covers criminal proceedings for dishonour of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act"). In doing so, the Supreme Court has widened and settled the scope of the applicability of Section 14 of the IBC. ......