Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 MAY 2025

Dispute Resolution & ADR Newsletter - May 2025

The May 2025 edition of Fox & Mandal's Dispute Resolution & ADR Newsletter analyses the post facto rejection of an implemented resolution due to non-compliance with IBC provisions; impleadment of parties that have not been served with a notice invoking arbitration; objections by minority members not an impediment to redevelopment projects; censorship of content containing fair criticism of judicial orders; and other recent judgments of the Supreme Court of India and High Courts.

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

An implemented resolution plan may be rejected post facto if it is found to be non-compliant with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Kalyani Transco v. Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd

Supreme Court of India | 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1010

The Supreme Court's recent rejection of an implemented resolution plan years after its approval reflects a hyper-technical view of procedural lapses and weakens the core objectives of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) of value maximisation and timely resolution, in addition to undermining the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). Citing procedural non-compliance – such as delayed payments, timeline breaches, and non-compliance with disclosure requirements under Section 29, which provides the eligibility criteria to be a resolution applicant – the Court's direction to liquidate does not seem to have considered mitigating factors such as payment of INR 19350 crore to creditors and equity infusion of

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from