The ‘nil’ payment paradox, starkly illustrated in the case of Vadraj Cement Limited, is more than just a procedural flaw; it is a fundamental breach of the very promise made by IBC upon its enactment, which is the revival of businesses and equitable treatment of all the stakeholders. 

India lacks a formal mechanism to address cross-border insolvency and restructuring. In practice, resolution of such matter’s hinges on ad hoc court-to-court cooperation or the recognition of foreign judgments under the Civil Procedure Code 1908.

While the regulation has the potential to facilitate faster and more value-maximizing outcomes, the lack of statutory guidance and procedural safeguards could inadvertently undermine the IBC’s foundational objectives.

India’s unique structure makes both asset-wise bids and DIP financing hard to pull off. Courts and regulators have shown the law can support flexible sales and super-priority finance, but operationally, every step bumps into entrenched obstacles.

[ Apeksha is a student at National University of Study and Research in Law. ] The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016  ( IBC ) was...

The IBBI’s 2025 amendments significantly improve India’s insolvency framework by making it more aligned with global best practices.

Although the Supreme Court of India’s decision has garnered significant criticism, it is not without its merits. It emphasizes how the integrity of the insolvency process must remain sacred. The IBC transcends the role of a simple debt recovery mechanism; it is a framework rooted in legal principles and the equitable treatment of all stakeholders involved.

In this article, the author identifies two major challenges revealed by the impugned judgments: lack of a statutory time limit to implement resolution plans and imprecise role of monitoring committees in ensuring implementation of resolution plans.

The reverse CIRP model remains judicially constructed and lacks a statutory base. The reforms provide structure and direction but require legislative harmonization to fully stabilize the process.

It is argued that the SC could have explored other possible remedies, such as sending the resolution plan back to CoC to remedy the non-compliances and imposing penalties on responsible entities.

Embracing a similar test in the IBC would avert unjust denial of valid financial claims dressed only as penalties. It would further strengthen creditor participation in the committee of creditors, allowing more balanced participation in the collective settlement process.

While the BPSL-JSW is already forming into a landmark precedent in the IBC landscape, it risks creating a precedent, which undermines the revival aspect of IBC and has the possibility of deterring future CIRP proceedings.

The Kalyani Transco judgement has highlighted certain inefficiencies in the Code, calling for a revaluation of its provisions.

As the IBC framework continues to evolve, successful distressed M&A will require specialized expertise, innovative structuring, and careful navigation of the unique legal complexities that characterize acquisitions under CIRP.

The article challenges the ruling in Independent Sugar by examining the statutory provisions and the judicial approach to the issue.

The article suggests some alternatives to green channel mechanism that would expedite the CIRP.

Prioritizing environmental claims during bankruptcy proceedings could diminish a company's overall value, thus needing express provisions.

Inviting resolution plans and, after analyzing the same, approaching liquidation would, in the author’s view, amount to commercial wisdom.

The post discusses the employment of the conjunctive test for preservation of the claims of genuine stakeholders within the COC.

There is need for balance to be struck between commercial wisdom and ensuring fair and equitable treatment of all stakeholders.

It is important that the law laid down in the case of Hari Babu Thota be reviewed.

This article presents flexible resolution approach as a way forward to curb the menace emanating from inclusion of going concern sale.

There is need for a legislative amendment to bring in consistency in the treatment given to security holders under a resolution plan.

Authors analyze the power of CoC to reconsider or review its approval in a case where the successful plan is pending the approval of AA.