“LIFE IS A SUCCESSION OF LESSONS WHICH MUST BE LIVED TO BE UNDERSTOOD.”
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corp. Limited v. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited and Anr.
Arbitration Clause not absolute bar for High Court to entertain Writ Petition in contractual matter – 12 May 2021
The Allahabad High Court had allowed the Writ Petition filed by CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd. against the order of Executive Engineer, Unnao, UPPCL regarding Labour Cess under the Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996.
An appeal was preferred against the decision of the Allahabad High Court to allow the petition.
The Supreme Court has held that the mere existence of the Arbitration Clause does not debar the Court from entertaining writ petitions.
Writ petitions are maintainable if:
(i) It seeks enforcement of a fundamental right;
(ii) There is failure of principles of natural justice;
(iii) Impugned orders or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction; or
(iv) The vires of an Act is under challenge.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
COMPETITION & UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
Neha Gupta v. Tata Motors Ltd & Ors.
CCI found a prima facie case of violation of provisions of the Competition Act by Tata Motors – 4 May 2021
A Tata Motors’ dealer from Uttar Pradesh alleged that the company’s terms for dealership included manufacturing and financing of commercial vehicles through the NBFCs, Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd and Tata Motors Finance Ltd., which was “abusive, anti-competitive and detrimental to the financial health of authorised dealers.”
This was also alleged by another dealer in Nashik.
The Commission found a prima facie case of violation by agreement among enterprises at different stages of production and abuse of dominance.
It directed the DG to complete the investigation and submit its report within 60 days.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
CORPORATE
Basavaraj Koujalagi v. Sumit Binani, Liquidator of Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd.
Decisions taken by Liquidators in good faith for the company undergoing liquidation proceedings are protected – 03 May 2021
There were allegations against the liquidator by the workers.
Dismissing the plea, the NCLT, Kolkata held that the decisions of the liquidators taken in good faith are protected under the IBC and also commented on the degree of autonomy accorded to liquidators.
It was held that “in the absence of any allegation of fraud or bias in the decisions of the liquidator, we cannot order a roving inquiry just on the basis of perceived loss of employment of the workers on account of a business decision taken by the liquidator”.
The Order can be accessed at:
View Details
Kapil Wadhawan v. The Administrator, Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited
Promoters can make a settlement proposal when the company is in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) – 19 May 2021
The Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) did not take up the settlement offer for consideration, which was made by the promoter of DHFL.
The NCLT noted that the offer made by the promoter is substantially higher than what is being offered by the winning bidder. Hence, it asked the CoC to put the offer up for consideration, decision and voting within the next 10 days.
The tribunal also observed that while promoters are barred from submitting a resolution plan under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), Wadhawan has submitted a one-time settlement offer and there is no express legal bar against such a submission.
The Order can be accessed at:
View Details
Regional Provident Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Vandana Gard and Ors.
Creditors can’t initiate proceedings to recover claims which are not part of approved Resolution Plan under IBC – 12 May 2021
The NCLAT held that all claims which are not part of the approved Resolution Plan shall stand extinguished.
No person is entitled to initiate or continue any proceeding regarding a claim that is not part of the resolution plan.
It further held that no proceedings in respect of such dues for the period prior to the date on which the Adjudicating Authority grants its approval under Section 31 could be continued.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
India Resurgence ARC Private Ltd. v. M/s Amit Metaliks Ltd. and Anr.
Resolution Plan cannot be challenged by Secured Creditor – 13 May 2021
It was contended in the appeal that the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) couldn’t have approved the resolution plan which failed to consider the priority and value of security interest of the creditors.
The Court observed that once all mandatory requirements are complied with, judicial review cannot be stretched merely due to dissatisfaction of a stakeholder.
The Supreme Court held that the Resolution Plan approved under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be challenged by dissenting secured creditors on grounds of higher amount payable on security interest.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Jagjeet Singh v. The State of Punjab
Hacking, Data Theft attract offences under IPC also, and not just the Information Technology Act – 18 May 2021
The FIR in consideration had allegations of theft of software, illegal copying of database and source code etc.
It had been urged that the allegations pertain to alleged theft of software and may amount only to offences under the IT Act.
The Supreme Court remarked that in a case of hacking and data theft, offences under the IPC would also be attracted and the IT Act would not exclude the applicability of the IPC.
Hence, the SLP was rejected and anticipatory bail was denied.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
Bennet Coleman Co. Ltd. v. Whatsapp Inc and Ors.
Circulation of e-papers violates copyright – 21 May 2021
The Delhi High Court restrained WhatsApp and Telegram from illegally circulating e-papers of The Times of India and sister publication Navbharat Times on their platforms.
It issued notices to the two apps along with certain individuals who are administrators of groups on their platforms while barring them from circulating e-papers for copyright violations.
It also issued notice to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology for its response on the suit.
The Order can be accessed at:
View Details
