01
Initiating and Defending Insolvency
Applications under sections 7, 9 and 10 to initiate the corporate insolvency resolution process, and the defence of admission, including the existence of a dispute and the question of default.
We act for financial creditors, operational creditors, resolution applicants, corporate debtors and guarantors through the insolvency process under the Code of 2016, from the application that admits a company into resolution, through the committee that decides its future, to the plan that revives it or the liquidation that closes it.
An insolvency mandate is a sequence of decisions taken under time pressure and in front of a tribunal. The application has to be admitted, the claims have to be proved, the committee has to be navigated and the plan has to be approved or the liquidation managed.
Applications under sections 7, 9 and 10 to initiate the corporate insolvency resolution process, and the defence of admission, including the existence of a dispute and the question of default.
Advising financial creditors on voting, on the conduct of the resolution professional and on the commercial decisions that the committee alone is empowered to take.
Preparing and defending resolution plans for applicants, and advising the committee on evaluation, on section 29A eligibility and on the treatment of dissenting creditors.
Conduct of liquidation where resolution fails, including the sale of the corporate debtor as a going concern, distribution under the waterfall and the avoidance of preferential and undervalued transactions.
Proceedings against personal guarantors to corporate debtors, a fast developing area where the guarantor and the principal borrower processes interact.
Appeals to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and onward to the Supreme Court, and cross-border coordination where assets or creditors sit outside India.
The Code prescribes the sequence and the timeline. Our work is to make each stage produce a clean, defensible record, because in insolvency the tribunal and the creditors decide on what is proved, not on what is asserted.
Establish or contest the default and the existence of a dispute, and file or defend the application for admission before the National Company Law Tribunal.
Prove and verify claims, and establish the committee of creditors with the voting shares that follow from the admitted debt.
Run or respond to the request for resolution plans, test section 29A eligibility and bring a compliant plan to the committee.
Secure approval of the plan by the committee and the tribunal, or move the company into liquidation where no plan succeeds.
Implement the approved plan or conduct the liquidation, and carry or defend any appeal to the appellate tribunal and the Supreme Court.
Every insolvency matter is read through three lenses at once. The claim and the plan have to be technically correct under the Code, the strategy has to make commercial sense for the creditor or the applicant, and the legal position has to hold before the tribunal and on appeal.
We get the application, the proof of claim, the constitution of the committee and the resolution plan technically right under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, because a defect in process is the most common reason a matter is delayed or set aside.
We weigh resolution against liquidation, recovery against time and the realistic value of a plan against its risk, so the creditor decision or the applicant bid is grounded in the commercial outcome rather than the contest itself.
We carry the position through admission, the committee, approval and any appeal to the appellate tribunal and the Supreme Court, preserving eligibility under section 29A and the lawfulness of the process at every step.
A resolution plan does not succeed because it offers the highest number. It succeeds because the applicant is eligible, the value is credible, the treatment of creditors is lawful and the committee has applied its commercial wisdom on a record that can withstand challenge. We build the plan and the file together.
The vocabulary that decides outcomes, set out precisely, not loosely.
The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 through which a resolution professional runs a defaulting company while a resolution plan is sought.
The Section 14 stay that suspends suits, recovery and enforcement against the corporate debtor for the duration of the resolution process.
The plan approved by the committee of creditors under Section 30 and sanctioned by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 31 that binds all stakeholders.
The provisions under which a financial creditor and an operational creditor respectively apply to the National Company Law Tribunal to initiate insolvency.
The PPIRP route under Section 54A available to micro, small and medium enterprises, allowing a debtor-led resolution within a compressed timeline.
Short, direct, on the record.
A financial creditor under section 7, an operational creditor under section 9 after a demand notice, and the corporate debtor itself under section 10 may initiate the process before the National Company Law Tribunal, on proof of a default that meets the prescribed threshold. For an operational creditor, admission can be resisted where there is a genuine pre-existing dispute. The choice of section, the proof of default and the readiness of the application all decide whether and how quickly a company is admitted into the process.
Once the process begins, the financial creditors form the committee of creditors, which takes the central commercial decisions, the appointment of the resolution professional, the approval of interim funding and, above all, the approval or rejection of a resolution plan. The tribunals treat the commercial wisdom of the committee on the merits of a plan with considerable deference, which means the reasoning recorded for a vote, and the lawfulness of the process behind it, carry real weight if the decision is later challenged.
Section 29A lists the persons who are not eligible to submit a resolution plan, and it is one of the most litigated provisions in the Code. It is aimed at keeping out, among others, those connected to the management that brought about the default, and its reach extends to connected persons and to certain disqualifications such as being a wilful defaulter. Because an ineligible applicant can derail an entire process, eligibility has to be examined and documented before a plan is put forward, not after a challenge is raised.
If the process ends without an approved plan within the permitted period, the corporate debtor moves into liquidation. Even in liquidation the preferred outcome is often a sale of the business as a going concern, which preserves value and employment better than a piecemeal sale of assets. The liquidator distributes the proceeds according to the statutory waterfall, and may pursue the avoidance of preferential, undervalued or fraudulent transactions to bring value back into the estate.
Yes. The Code provides for insolvency proceedings against personal guarantors to corporate debtors, and this has become an active area as creditors seek to enforce guarantees alongside the resolution of the principal borrower. The two processes interact, and questions such as the effect of an approved resolution plan on the guarantor liability continue to be settled by the courts. We advise both creditors enforcing guarantees and guarantors facing proceedings on how the corporate and personal processes affect each other.
Income tax, transfer pricing, withholding and treaty interpretation
Merger filings, dominance, cartels and CCI proceedings
Economic offences, PMLA, SEBI enforcement and internal investigations
The strongest outcomes are built into the strategy at the start, not recovered from disputes later.