Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Companies Act, 2013

129 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED)versus63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED & OTHERS

2025 INSC 42131 March 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the corporate insolvency resolution of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL), where Piramal Capital submitted a resolution plan (RP) that allocated recoveries from Section 66 applications to itself. The plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and the National Company Law

NATIONAL HIGH SPEED RAIL CORPORATION LIMITEDversusMONTECARLO LIMITED & ANR

2022 INSC 12431 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL) issued a tender for the Mumbai‑Ahmedabad Bullet Train project, which is funded by a loan from Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). Monte Carlo Limited submitted a technical bid that was rejected by NHSRCL as non‑responsive due to material deviations, a

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIAversusRAJKUMAR NAGPAL & ORS

2022 INSC 88530 August 2022Case Partly allowed

Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd (RCFL) issued non‑convertible debentures and defaulted in March 2019. The RBI issued a prudential framework requiring lenders to enter into an inter‑creditor agreement (ICA) before a resolution plan, and SEBI later issued a circular on 13 Oct 2020 standardising the procedure for debentur

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANKversusMR. VIJAY SITARAM DANDNAIK & ANR.

2022 INSC 88730 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Punjab National Bank (PNB) filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) against Jailaxmi Sugar Products Pvt Ltd, alleging default and seeking initiation of a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP). The Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) issued a certificate of recovery on 1 November 20

VISA COKE LIMITEDversusM/S MESCO KALINGA STEEL LIMITED

2025 INSC 59729 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Visa Coke Ltd., an operational creditor, claimed that it had validly served a statutory demand notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by sending Form 3 to the Key Managerial Personnel (KMP) of Mesco Kalinga Steel Ltd. at its registered office. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and th

HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED & ANR.DIA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2019 INSC 128927 November 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of writ petitions filed by Hindustan Construction Company Ltd seeking to strike down Section 87 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019 and the deletion of Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment, arguing that they revived an automatic‑stay of arbitral awards and removed th

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusINDIA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED

2024 INSC 77427 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

State Bank of India (SBI) appealed an order of the NCLT rejecting its IBC petition against India Power Corporation Limited. The appeal was filed three days after the statutory 30‑day period, and SBI sought condonation of delay, relying on a free certified copy of the NCLT order sent under Rule 50. A split decision aros

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusRAHUL MODI AND ANR. ETC.

2019 INSC 40827 March 2019Disposed off

The Central Government assigned the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) to investigate a group of companies under an order dated 20‑06‑2018, directing a report within three months. The SFIO arrested Rahul Modi and others on 10‑12‑2018, after the three‑month period had expired, leading the petitioners to file habe

MACKINTOSH BURN LIMITEDversusSARKAR AND CHOWDHURY ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED

2018 INSC 26927 March 2018Disposed off

Mackintosh Burn Ltd, a public company with the Government of West Bengal as majority shareholder, refused to register the transfer of 100 shares to itself, alleging that the applicant was controlled by a competitor and that the transfer could affect the company’s interest. The respondent sought registration, and the Co

AHMED ABDULLA AHMED AL GHURAIR (THROUGH THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. BARTHOLOMEW KAMYA) & ANR.versusSTAR HEALTH AND ALLIED INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

2018 INSC 110026 November 2018Dismissed

The plaintiffs, Dubai nationals and shareholders of a Dubai‑incorporated company (Defendant No.2), filed a derivative suit in the Madras High Court seeking a declaration that Defendant No.2 held the beneficial interest in 6.16% of the shares of an Indian company (Defendant No.1) that were registered in the names of oth

RATHISH BABU UNNIKRISHNANversusTHE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2022 INSC 48026 April 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan, challenged a summoning order issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that the cheques were security instruments for a share buy‑back and not payable on a legally enforceable debt. The Delhi High Court dismissed his petition under Section 482 of

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITEDversusCYRUS INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2021 INSC 21726 March 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the NCLAT order that had declared Tata Sons' affairs oppressive and prejudicial, reinstated Cyrus Pallonji Mistry (CPM) as Executive Chairman and Director, restrained the Tata Trust nominees, and set aside the conversion of Tata Sons from a public to a private company. The Court held that the

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2021 INSC 22226 March 2021Dismissed

The Association for Democratic Reforms and Common Cause filed two interlocutory applications seeking a stay on the sale of electoral bonds under the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018, alleging that the scheme permits donor anonymity and violates transparency in political funding. The Court examined the scheme’s statutory bas

MR.SURENDER KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERSversusJ M HOUSING LIMITED AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 12226 February 2021Disposed off

The appellants filed a petition under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 alleging oppression and mismanagement, and the NCLT issued an ex‑parte ad‑interim order on 5 October 2020. The respondents appealed to the NCLAT, which set aside the NCLT order on the ground that it violated natural justice and remitt

SWISS RIBBONS PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 9525 January 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of several provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, including the classification of financial versus operational creditors, the powers of the resolution professional, the evidentiary status of private information utilities, and the requirements of Se

CHERAN PROPERTIES LIMITEDversusKASTURI AND SONS LIMITED AND ORS.

2018 INSC 39424 April 2018Dismissed

The dispute arose from a share purchase agreement where KCP and its nominees, including Cheran Properties Limited (the appellant), were to acquire shares of SPIL from KSL. The parties later entered arbitration, which awarded KSL the return of share documents and payment of Rs 3.58 crore. The award attained finality, an

BIKRAM CHATTERJI & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2019 INSC 79923 July 2019Dismissed not complying condition order

Home buyers booked flats in various projects of the Amrapali Group of companies in Noida and Greater Noida, paying substantial amounts between 2010-2014. The builders failed to deliver possession within the promised 36 months and did not pay dues to the Noida and Greater Noida Authorities or repay loans taken from bank

VIDYASAGAR PRASADversusUCO BANK & ANR.

2024 INSC 81022 October 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a suspended director of the corporate debtor, challenged the admission of a Section 7 application initiating a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by UCO Bank, arguing that the debtor's balance‑sheet entries did not constitute a clear, specific acknowledgment of debt required under Section 18

V NAGARAJANversusSKS ISPAT AND POWER LTD.& ORS.

2021 INSC 66322 October 2021Dismissed

The appellant, V. Nagarajan, challenged an order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dated 31 December 2019 that dismissed his application for interim relief in a liquidation proceeding. He filed an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on 8 June 2020, relying on a free certified cop

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.versusAJAY BHATIA

2022 INSC 100522 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (the appellant) owned two adjacent plots, 4/4 and 4/5, in Azadpur, Delhi, and operated petrol stations on both. Ajay Bhatia (the respondent) filed a suit seeking possession and mesne profits for Plot 4/4 after the lease expired in 2003. The trial court decreed possession of Plot 4/4

ASHOK G. RAJANIversusBEACON TRUSTEESHIP LTD. & ORS

2022 INSC 100322 September 2022Dismissed

The corporate debtor, Seya Industries Ltd., and its investors, including Beacon Trusteeship Ltd., entered into a debenture arrangement which later gave rise to arbitration and a claim for payment. While arbitration was pending, the investors filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) i

SESH NATH SINGH & ANR.versusBAIDYABATI SHEORAPHULI CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND ANR.

2021 INSC 19922 March 2021Dismissed

The petitioners, Sesh Nath Singh and others, challenged the National Company Law Tribunal's (NCLT) order admitting a Section 7 application by Baidyabati Sheoraphuli Co‑operative Bank to initiate corporate insolvency resolution against the corporate debtor. The issue was whether the three‑year limitation period for fili

FORECH INDIA LTD.versusEDELWEISS ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION CO. LTD.

2019 INSC 7722 January 2019Disposed off

Forech India Ltd. filed a winding‑up petition in the Delhi High Court in 2014 against a company, serving notice under Rule 26 of the Companies (Court) Rules. Later, a financial creditor (Respondent No.1) filed an insolvency petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) before the NCLT, which was ad

MOBILOX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusKIRUSA SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED

2017 INSC 97521 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Mobilox Innovations Pvt Ltd, an operational creditor, filed an application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) seeking initiation of corporate insolvency against Kirusa Software Pvt Ltd for an unpaid operational debt of Rs.20,08,202.55. The corporate debtor raised a dispute, alleging breach of a non‑di

LALIT KUMAR JAINversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 29721 May 2021Dismissed

The petitioners, who were personal guarantors to corporate debtors, challenged a Central Government notification dated 15‑Nov‑2019 that brought certain provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) into force only for personal guarantors. They argued that the notification exceeded the power conferred by

ELECTROSTEEL STEEL LIMITED (NOW M/S ESL STEEL LIMITED)versusISPAT CARRIER PRIVATE LIMITED

2025 INSC 52521 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Electrosteel Steel Ltd. (now ESL Steel Ltd.) filed a petition under Article 227 challenging an order that directed it to comply with an arbitral award dated 06.07.2018 passed by the West Bengal MSME Facilitation Council in favour of Ispat Carrier Pvt. Ltd. The award was rendered after the corporate debtor’s insolvency

M/S KALEDONIA JUTE AND FIBRES PVT. LTD.versusM/S AXIS NIRMAN AND INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS.

2020 INSC 64819 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Kaledonia Jute and Fibres Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) sought to recover a debt from M/s Axis Nirman and Industries Ltd. (first respondent) and filed a petition under Section 7 of the IBC before the NCLT. Simultaneously, a winding‑up petition against the first respondent was pending before the Allahabad High Court, which

INFRASTRUCTURE LEASING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LTDversusHDFC BANK LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 92919 October 2023Dismissed

Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd (IL&FS) obtained a ₹400 crore loan from HDFC Bank, securing the facility by assigning lease‑rental receivables to the bank under a Master Facility Agreement, Assignment Agreement and related escrow documents. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) issued an

AVITEL POST STUDIOZ LIMITED & ORS.versusHSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED

2020 INSC 49819 August 2020Disposed off

Avitel Post Studioz Ltd and its promoters invested USD 60 million in HSBC based on alleged representations that Avitel would secure a lucrative BBC contract, which later proved to be fictitious. HSBC obtained interim awards and a foreign final award from a Singapore tribunal finding the appellants liable for fraudulent

INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIAversusSATYANARAYAN BANKATLAL MALU & ORS.

2024 INSC 31919 April 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) filed a criminal complaint under Sections 73(a) and 235A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against the former directors of SBM Paper Mills for non‑compliance with a One‑Time Settlement ordered by the NCLT. The Sessions Judge issued process, but the res

SUNIL KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERSversusSUNDARESH BHATT AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 43819 April 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellants, workmen and employees of ABG Shipyard Ltd., claimed wages, salaries and statutory dues for the period of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). They argued that these amounts should be treated as insolvency resolution process costs under s.5(13) of the IBC and thus enjoy priority under s.53

M.K. RANJITSINH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 25819 April 2021Directions issued

The petitioners, environmentalists, sought protection for the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and Lesser Florican, arguing that overhead power lines in Rajasthan and Gujarat cause fatal collisions. They requested that the states and the Union underground all future power lines in priority and potential habitats, convert exi

MANISH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2021 INSC 2819 January 2021Dismissed

The petitioners challenged Sections 3, 4, and 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020, which introduced threshold requirements for allottees and certain financial creditors to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), clarified that a corporate debtor can initiate CIRP against anot

SAGUFA AHMED & ORS.versusUPPER ASSAM PLYWOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2020 INSC 55518 September 2020Dismissed

The appellants, shareholders of Upper Assam Plywood Products Pvt. Ltd., sought winding up of the company before the NCLT, which dismissed their petition on 25 October 2019. They applied for a certified copy of the order, received it on 19 December 2019, and filed an appeal before the NCLAT on 20 July 2020 together with

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONversusUNION OF INDIA

2020 INSC 49418 August 2020Dismissed

The Centre for Public Interest Litigation filed a writ petition seeking a fresh National Disaster Management Plan, specific minimum relief standards, and direction to use the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) for COVID-19, as well as to channel all contributions to the NDRF instead of the PM CARES Fund. The Court

BANK OF BARODA & ANRversusMBL INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED & ORS.

2022 INSC 5318 January 2022Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the scope of Section 29A(h) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which bars persons who have executed an enforceable guarantee that has been invoked by a creditor from being a resolution applicant. The Court held that the disqualification arises when the guarantee is invoked, applies

PASCHIMANCHAL VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD.versusRAMAN ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

2023 INSC 62517 July 2023Dismissed

Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (PVVNL) supplied electricity to Raman Ispat Pvt Ltd, which defaulted on payments. PVVNL attached the debtor's assets and, after the corporate insolvency resolution failed, the matter proceeded to liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). PVVNL contended that secti

NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusANAND SONBHADRA

2022 INSC 57817 May 2022Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), as the lessor in a 90‑year lease of land for a residential project, could be treated as a financial creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Court held that the lease does not qualify as a financial lease unde

DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LTD.versusANTRIX CORPORATION LTD. & ANR

2022 INSC 4917 January 2022Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the winding‑up petition filed by Antrix Corporation against Devas Multimedia Private Ltd under section 271(c) of the Companies Act, 2013, alleging fraud in the formation and conduct of the company. The petition was never advertised, and the petitioners challenged the order on grounds of lack

M/S. PAWAN HANS LIMITED & ORS.versusAVIATION KARMACHARI SANGHATANA & ORS.

2020 INSC 5117 January 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Pawan Hans Ltd., a government‑owned company, was exempt from the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act) and whether its contractual employees were entitled to provident‑fund benefits. The trade union representing the contractual workers claimed tha

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.versusPAWAN KUMAR GUPTA

2015 INSC 66516 September 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), a statutory corporation that had acquired the assets and liabilities of the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), could invoke Article 112 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which grants a thirty‑year limitation period for suits by the Central Government.

ACTION ISPAT AND POWER PVT. LTD.versusSHYAM METALICS AND ENERGY LTD.

2020 INSC 69915 December 2020Dismissed

Action Ispat and Power Pvt. Ltd. filed a winding‑up petition against Shyam Metalics and Energy Ltd. for unpaid dues. The Company Judge admitted the petition, appointed an Official Liquidator and seized the appellant's premises. State Bank of India, a secured creditor, filed an IBC application and sought transfer of the

DISABLED RIGHTS GROUP & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 124415 December 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court heard a public‑interest writ filed by Disabled Rights Group seeking enforcement of reservation, accessibility and teaching‑facility provisions for persons with disabilities in higher education. The petitioners argued that institutions were not complying with the 3% reservation under the 1995 Disabilit

ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LIMITEDversusBISHAL JAISWAL & ANR.

2021 INSC 25415 April 2021Disposed off

The Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd., a consortium of lenders, filed a Section 7 application before the NCLT seeking initiation of corporate insolvency proceedings against Corporate Power Ltd. after the latter defaulted on its loans. The NCLT admitted the application, relying on entries in the debtor's balance

ARUN KUMAR JAGATRAMKAversusJINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. & ANR.

2021 INSC 18715 March 2021Dismissed

The corporate debtor Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd (GNCL) initiated a corporate insolvency resolution process, but its promoter Arun Kumar Jagatramka was deemed ineligible to submit a resolution plan under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). After the liquidation order, Jagatramka filed an application under

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 11315 February 2024

The Supreme Court of India struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and related amendments to the Finance Act 2017, which had introduced anonymous financial contributions to political parties. The Court held that the scheme violated the right to information of voters under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, as informat

FUTURE COUPONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.versusAMAZON.COM NV INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC & ORS

2022 INSC 18315 February 2022Disposed off

Future Retail Ltd (FRL) and Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) entered into a sale agreement with Reliance Group, which Amazon challenged by initiating arbitration at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). An emergency arbitrator issued an injunction restraining FRL from proceeding with the deal, and the Del

SHAKTI YEZDANI & ANR.versusJAYANAND JAYANT SALGAONKAR & ORS.

2023 INSC 107614 December 2023Dismissed

The testator, Jayant Shivram Salgaonkar, died leaving fixed deposits and mutual fund securities for which he had nominated certain family members under Section 109A of the Companies Act, 1956 and Bye‑law 9.11.1 of the Depositories Act, 1996. The nominees claimed that the nomination gave them absolute beneficial ownersh

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusV. RAMAKRISHNAN & ANR.

2018 INSC 71114 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

State Bank of India (SBI) sought recovery of a loan from a corporate debtor whose managing director, V. Ramakrishnan, had also given a personal guarantee. After the corporate debtor defaulted, SBI invoked SARFAESI provisions and the debtor filed an insolvency petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016

DHANASINGH PRABHUversusCHANDRASEKAR & ANOTHER

2025 INSC 83114 July 2025Case Allowed

The appellant, Dhanasingh Prabhu, advanced a loan of Rs.21 lakh to the respondents who were partners of the partnership firm “Mouriya Coirs”. The respondents issued a cheque in the name of the firm which was dishonoured, prompting the appellant to serve a statutory notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

CHINTALAPATI SRINIVASA RAJUversusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2018 INSC 51014 May 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined multiple appeals arising from the Satyam scandal, where the appellant, Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju, a former executive and non‑executive director of Satyam Computer Services Ltd (SCSL) and co‑brother of its chairman, was shown cause for insider trading under SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Tradi

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2015 INSC 41014 May 2015Disposed off

The Madras Bar Association challenged several provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 relating to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), alleging that their constitution and the qualifications for members violated the basic structure of the Constitution. The Supr

VICTORY IRON WORKS LTD.versusJITENDRA LOHIA & ANR

2023 INSC 23014 March 2023Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a dispute arising out of a corporate insolvency resolution process involving Avani Towers (the corporate debtor), Energy Properties (the ostensible owner of a 10.19‑acre land), and Victory Iron Works (a licensee of a 10,000 sq ft portion). The corporate debtor had financed the purchase of t

H.D.F.C. BANK LIMITEDversusKISHORE K. MEHTA (DEAD) THR. LRS.

2026 INSC 68813 July 2026Dismissed

HDFC Bank Limited sought to initiate insolvency proceedings against Kishore K. Mehta under Section 9(2) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, relying on a recovery certificate issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in 2004. The bank argued that the term "decree or order" in the statute should be interpreted

ASPINWALL AND CO. LTD.versusINSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

2026 INSC 35913 April 2026Dismissed

Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. amalgamated with Pullangode Rubber & Produce Co. Ltd., with the scheme approved in 2006 and the appointed date set as 01‑01‑2006. The appellant sought to set off the accumulated losses of the amalgamating company against its own income under the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1991, relying on

JAIPUR METALS & ELECTRICALS EMPLOYEES ORGANIZATION THROUGH GENERAL SECRETARY MR. TEJ RAM MEENAversusJAIPUR METALS & ELECTRICALS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR & ORS.

2018 INSC 119612 December 2018Leave granted

The employees' union of Jaipur Metals & Electricals Ltd challenged a High Court order that refused to transfer winding‑up proceedings, filed under Section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act, to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and set aside an NCLT order admitting a Section 7 insolvency application by Alch

ASIAN HOTELS (NORTH) LTD.versusALOK KUMAR LODHA & ORS

2022 INSC 71312 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Asian Hotels (North) Ltd., the licensor, granted individual shop licenses to various shopkeepers, including the respondents, and later revoked those licenses. The respondents filed suits seeking a declaration that their licenses were irrevocable and perpetual. While the suits were pending, they applied to amend their p

GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusPRABHJIT SINGH SONI & ANR.

2024 INSC 10212 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) claimed that it had submitted a claim of Rs 43.40 crore as a financial creditor against JNC Construction Ltd., but the resolution professional treated it as an operational creditor and the resolution plan approved by the NCLT omitted its claim and undervalued i

B.K. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPARAG GUPTA AND ASSOCIATES

2018 INSC 95611 October 2018

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by B.K. Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. challenging the applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963 to applications under Sections 7 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and the retrospective effect of the newly inserted Section 238A. The Court examined the Insolvency La

RELIGARE FINVEST LIMITEDversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2023 INSC 81911 September 2023Disposed off

Religare Finvest Ltd. sued the erstwhile Lakshmi Vilas Bank (LVB) for alleged misappropriation of fixed deposits used as security for loans, leading to a criminal complaint and FIR under IPC sections 409 and 120B. LVB was placed under moratorium by the RBI and subsequently amalgamated into DBS Bank India Ltd. under a s

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 19511 March 2024

The Supreme Court had earlier declared the Electoral Bond Scheme unconstitutional and directed the State Bank of India (SBI), as the authorized bank, to furnish the Election Commission of India (ECI) with details of each bond purchased and redeemed between 12 April 2019 and 15 February 2024. SBI filed a Miscellaneous A

JYOTI LIMITEDversusBSE LIMITED & ANR

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 111710 December 2024Dismissed

Jyoti Limited sought to list equity shares on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) that were allotted to an Asset Reconstruction Company (RARE) after converting part of its debt into equity. The BSE rejected the application, stating that Jyoti had not obtained in‑principle approval from the exchange and had not secured a sh

BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD.versusVCK SHARES & STOCK BROKING SERVICES LTD.

2022 INSC 119310 November 2022Dismissed

Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. (now part of ICICI Bank) granted a term loan and overdraft facility to VCK Shares & Stock Broking Services Ltd., which defaulted. The bank sought recovery of the debt before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDB Act).

PANNALAL BHANSALIversusBHARTI TELECOM LIMITED & ORS.

2026 INSC 21310 March 2026Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by minority shareholders of Bharti Telecom Limited (BTL) who challenged the company’s reduction of share capital under s.66 of the Companies Act, 2013, alleging that the valuation and the notice were unfair and misleading. BTL had cancelled 28.4 million shares held by the appellan

KALPRAJ DHARAMSHI & ANR.versusKOTAK INVESTMENT ADVISORS LTD. & ANR.

2021 INSC 17310 March 2021Disposed off

The corporate debtor Ricoh India Ltd. initiated a corporate insolvency resolution process under the IBC, inviting resolution plans. Kotak Investment Advisors Ltd. (KIAL) submitted its plan on time, while Kalpraj submitted a belated plan which was later accepted by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and approved by the NC

CHALASANI UDAYA SHANKAR AND OTHERSversusM/S. LEXUS TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 6719 September 2024Case Allowed

The appellants, who claimed to have purchased 94.8% of the equity shares of M/s. Lexus Technologies Pvt. Ltd., filed a company petition before the NCLT seeking rectification of the Register of Members under Sections 59 and 88 of the Companies Act, 2013 and relief for oppression, mismanagement and fraud. The NCLT, and s

DELHI AIRPORT METRO EXPRESS PVT. LTD.versusDELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD.

2021 INSC 4649 September 2021Disposed off

The Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. (DAMEPL) and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC) entered into a concession agreement for the Airport Metro Express Line. DMRC was served a termination notice for alleged defects in the civil structure, which DAMEPL claimed were not cured within the 90‑day period, leading t

CHITRA SHARMA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2018 INSC 6819 August 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

Jaypee Infratech Ltd (JIL) defaulted on a loan from IDBI Bank, prompting the bank to initiate a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Home buyers filed a writ petition alleging that the CIRP ignored their interests and sought a pro‑rata refund of the Rs 750

YERRAM VIJAY KUMARversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

2026 INSC 429 January 2026Case Partly allowed

The dispute arose between the promoters of M/s Shreemukh Namitha Homes Pvt Ltd and two former directors over alleged illegal convening of an extraordinary general meeting, appointment of directors, and filing of false documents on the MCA website. The complainant filed a private complaint before the Special Court, whic

PURNIMA MANTHENA AND ANOTHERversusDR. RENUKA DATLA & OTHERS

2015 INSC 7388 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose in Biological E. Ltd. after the death of its promoter, when the widow (respondent No.1) and her three daughters were appointed directors. The widow challenged the validity of board meetings held on 9‑4‑2013, 10‑4‑2013 and 11‑4‑2013, the appointment of her daughters as directors and the continuance of

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusADITYA SARDA

2025 INSC 4778 April 2025Disposed off

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) investigated alleged fraud involving the Adarsh Group and filed a criminal complaint before a Special Court, which took cognizance of offences under the Companies Act, 2013 and the IPC and issued bailable and later non‑bailable warrants against 16 respondents. The responden

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITEDversusMR. AMIT GUPTA & ORS.

2021 INSC 1638 March 2021Dismissed

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd (GUVNL) allocated a 25‑MW solar project to Astonfield Solar (the corporate debtor) under a 25‑year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) executed in 2010. After severe flood damage the plant operated at a fraction of capacity and the corporate debtor was declared a non‑performing asset, prompting

M/S HPCL BIO-FUELS LTD.versusM/S SHAHAJI BHANUDAS BHAD

2024 INSC 8517 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, HPCL Bio‑Fuels Ltd., entered into turnkey contracts with the respondent, Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad, for equipment supply. After a dispute over unpaid dues arose in 2014, the respondent invoked the arbitration clause and filed a Section 11(6) application in the Bombay High Court in February 2018, which he unc

SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICEversusRAHUL MODI & ORS.

2022 INSC 1587 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) appealed against the Delhi High Court's order granting statutory bail to Rahul Modi and others, who had been arrested in connection with alleged offences under the Companies Act and the Indian Penal Code. The charge‑sheet was filed within the 60‑day period prescribed by Sec

THE PROPERTY COMPANY (P) LTD.versusROHINTEN DADDY MAZDA

2026 INSC 337 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a beneficiary of shares bequeathed by his mother, sought registration of the transmission of those shares after the company refused to register them. The refusal triggered an appeal under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, which the respondent failed to file within the prescribed two‑month period; he la

COX AND KINGS LTD.versusSAP INDIA PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2023 INSC 10516 December 2023

The Supreme Court examined whether the "group of companies" doctrine, which allows an arbitration agreement signed by one member of a corporate group to bind non‑signatory affiliates, is valid under Indian law and how it should be applied. The Court considered the interpretation of the phrase "claiming through or under

EVA AGRO FEEDS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR.

2023 INSC 8096 September 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Eva Agro Feeds Private Ltd bid the reserve price of Rs.10 crore for a corporate debtor's property in an e‑auction and was issued a certificate of winning on 20 July 2021. The liquidator cancelled the auction the next day under Clause 3(k) of the E‑Auction Process Information Document without giving any reasons, prompti

STATE TAX OFFICER (1)versusRAINBOW PAPERS LIMITED

2022 INSC 9276 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The State Tax Officer (appellant) claimed GST and CST dues of about Rs. 47.36 crore from Rainbow Papers Limited (respondent) during a corporate insolvency resolution process. The claim was filed after the deadline prescribed in the IBBI Regulations and was waived by the Resolution Professional, leading to the approval

K. PARAMASIVAMversusTHE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD. & ANR.

2022 INSC 9266 September 2022Dismissed

The financial creditor, Karur Vysya Bank, advanced loans to three non‑corporate borrowers who defaulted. Maharaja Theme Parks and Resorts Private Limited (MTPR) had given corporate guarantees for those loans. The bank filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to initiate a Corpora

ARUNA OSWALversusPANKAJ OSWAL & ORS.

2020 INSC 4486 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Abhey Kumar Oswal had nominated his wife Aruna Oswal as nominee of his shares under the Companies Act, 2013. After his death, his son Pankaj Oswal filed a partition suit claiming one‑fourth of the estate, including shares in two companies, while the High Court ordered a status‑quo in favour of the nominee.

ARVIND DHAMversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2026 INSC 126 January 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former promoter and non‑executive chairman of Amtek Auto Ltd., was arrested in July 2024 on allegations of massive bank fraud and money‑laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Despite cooperating with the investigation and being the sole accused taken into custody among 28

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) – 2versusM/S. MAHAGUN REALTORS (P) LTD.

2022 INSC 3895 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Mahagun Realtors Private Ltd. (MRPL) merged with Mahagun India Private Ltd. (MIPL) by a court‑sanctioned scheme effective 1 April 2006. The Income Tax Department issued assessment notices and later an assessment order in the name of MRPL, which had ceased to exist after the amalgamation. The revenue argued that the ass

K. SASHIDHARversusINDIAN OVERSEAS BANK & ORS.

2019 INSC 1485 February 2019Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by K. Sashidhar challenging the rejection of resolution plans for two corporate debtors, KS&PIPL and IIL, by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The CoC had approved the plans with less than the statutory 75% voting share of financial creditors, leading the NCLT to deem the plans reje

SANJAY PANDURANG KALATEversusVISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 10634 December 2023Disposed off

The appellant, a former director of Evirant Developers Private Ltd, challenged an interlocutory order of the NCLT dismissing his application alleging unauthorized filing of a reply in a Section 7 proceeding. The NCLT heard the matter on 17 May 2023 but did not pronounce a substantive order until it was uploaded on 30 M

ARCELORMITTAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSATISH KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.

2018 INSC 9354 October 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the eligibility of ArcelorMittal India Private Ltd (AMIPL) and Numetal Ltd to submit resolution plans for Essar Steel India Ltd (ESIL) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) after the introduction of Section 29A. The Court held that disqualification under sub‑clause (c) of Section 29A

HARI SANKARANversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2019 INSC 6914 June 2019Dismissed

The Central Government, alleging mismanagement and public‑interest prejudice in IL&FS and its group companies, obtained an order from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) suspending the existing board and appointing a new one under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act. Subsequently, the Government applied unde

M/S VISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LTD & ORS.versusMR. DINKAR VENKATASUBRAMANIAN & ANR.

2023 INSC 5004 May 2023Disposed off

The corporate debtor Amtek Auto Ltd pledged 66.77% of its shares in JMT Auto Ltd as security to M/s Vistra ITCL (appellant No.1) for short‑term loans extended to its group companies. Vistra filed a claim as a secured creditor, which was rejected by the resolution professional and later by the adjudicating authority. Th

A. RAJENDRAversusGONUGUNTA MADHUSUDHAN RAO & ORS.

2025 INSC 4474 April 2025Dismissed

The appellant, a shareholder and suspended managing director of a corporate debtor, filed two appeals under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) against orders of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) without first applying for condonation of delay. The appellant argued that the limitation perio

IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSICGIL INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 94 January 2023Dismissed

IFB Agro Industries, a listed company, alleged that SICGIL India Ltd. and related persons acquired more than 5% of its shares from the open market without making the disclosures required under SEBI's Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover (SAST) Regulations and Insider Trading (PIT) Regulations. The appellant f

ADESH KAURversusEICHER MOTORS LIMITED AND ORS.

2018 INSC 5713 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Adesh Kaur, owned 903 equity shares in Eicher Motors Ltd. In 2012, an impersonator forged her signature, obtained a change of address from the company's share transfer agent (respondent No. 2) and secured duplicate share certificates, which were then transferred to a third party (respondent No. 8). Upon

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusDELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP & ANR

2023 INSC 4843 May 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether proceedings under Section 140(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 can continue after an auditor resigns, and whether the provision is constitutionally valid. The Court held that the NCLT's enquiry under Section 140(5) must run to its logical end irrespective of the auditor's resignation, an

M. K. RAJAGOPALANversusDR. PERIASAMY PALANI GOUNDER & ANR

2023 INSC 4863 May 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals challenging the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's (NCLAT) order that set aside the approval of a resolution plan for Appu Hotels Ltd. The Court held that the resolution applicant, M.K. Rajagopalan, was ineligible to submit a plan because he was the managing trustee

DBS BANK LIMITED SINGAPOREversusRUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 143 January 2024Matter referred to larger bench

DBS Bank Limited Singapore extended a USD 50 million loan to Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, secured by first charges over immovable assets. A resolution plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors with 96.95% support, but DBS dissented, receiving a pro‑rata distribution that was lower than the liquidation value of

BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusVIJAYKUMAR V. IYER AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 153 January 2024Dismissed

Bharti Airtel Ltd. and Bharti Hexacom Ltd. entered into spectrum trading agreements with Aircel Ltd. and Dishnet Wireless Ltd., which later led to disputes over bank guarantees and payments. When Aircel entered the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Airtel claimed a right to set‑off Rs. 112.87 crore agains

MRS. SHAILJA KRISHNAversusSATORI GLOBAL LIMITED & ORS.

2025 INSC 10652 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. Shailja Krishna, a majority shareholder and former executive director of Satori Global Limited, alleged that the company’s board had fraudulently obtained her signature on a gift deed and share transfer forms, thereby oppressing her and mismanaging the company. The NCLT had earlier granted her relief under Section

DR. VIMAL SUKUMARversusD. LAWRENCE & ORS.

2025 INSC 6222 May 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals challenging two Madras High Court orders that declared the 7‑3‑2022 Special Synod meeting of the Church of South India (CSI) invalid, set aside the amendments to the CSI Constitution, and ordered re‑election of all office bearers. The Court held that the Special Synod meeting was duly

BENGAL CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSN.versusKALYAN CHOWDHURY

2018 INSC 912 February 2018Dismissed

Bengal Chemists & Druggists Assn. appealed against an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) that dismissed its appeal as not maintainable because it was filed nine days after the initial 45‑day limitation period and after the additional 45‑day grace period had also expired. The appellant argued t

SUNITA PALITA & OTHERSversusM/S PANCHAMI STONE QUARRY

2022 INSC 7751 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, who were independent, non‑executive directors of MBL Infrastructure Ltd., were impleaded as accused in a complaint under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of an account‑payee cheque signed by the company’s managing director. They filed a criminal revision under Se

ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LIMITEDversusTULIP STAR HOTELS LIMITED & ORS.

2022 INSC 7771 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd., a financial creditor, against a NCLAT order that held a Section 7(2) IBC application against V. Hotels Ltd. was time‑barred. The Court clarified that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to IBC applications and that the three‑year limitation

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA

2022 INSC 7781 August 2022Disposed off

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Bar Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging a 2019 Ministry of Corporate Affairs notification that appointed 28 NCLT members for a three‑year term, alleging it contravened Section 413 of the Companies Act, 2013 which mandates a five‑year term. The Union of

SANKET KUMAR AGARWAL & ANRversusAPG LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED

2023 INSC 7271 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) in June 2021, which the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dismissed on 26 August 2022. They applied for a certified copy of the order, received it on 15 September 2022, and e‑filed an appeal before the National Company Law Ap

P. MOHANRAJ & ORS.versusM/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PVT. LTD.

2021 INSC 1331 March 2021Disposed off

The appellant company failed to honour multiple cheques, leading the respondent to issue statutory notices under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and file criminal complaints. While the corporate debtor was placed under a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), the

A. NAVINCHANDRA STEELS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 1281 March 2021Dismissed

A. Navinchandra Steels Private Limited, an operational creditor, challenged the admission of a Section 7 petition filed by SREI Equipment Finance Limited before the NCLT, arguing that a winding‑up petition against the same debtor was already pending in the Bombay High Court and that the Companies Act provisions should

FUTURE COUPONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.versusAMAZON.COM NV INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC & ORS.

2022 INSC 1291 February 2022

Future Coupons Private Ltd (FCPL) and Future Retail Ltd (FRL) challenged orders of the Delhi High Court Single Judge that enforced an emergency arbitrator’s interim award in a dispute over FRL’s sale of retail assets to Reliance. The appellants alleged that the judge denied them a fair opportunity to present their defe

PHOENIX ARC PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSPADE FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 511 February 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Spade Financial Services Ltd. and AAA Landmark Pvt. Ltd. could be treated as financial creditors of AKME Projects Ltd. during its corporate insolvency resolution process. It held that the transactions between the corporate debtor and the two entities were collusive, lacking genuine di

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 & ANR.versusM/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.

2025 INSC 381 January 2025Dismissed

M/s Jupiter Capital Pvt. Ltd. held a 99.88% share in Asianet News Network Pvt. Ltd. which reduced its share capital from 15,35,05,750 to 10,000 shares, proportionately reducing Jupiter's holding to 9,988 shares and receiving Rs. 3,17,83,474 as consideration. The Revenue argued that this reduction did not constitute a "

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search