This website is only for informational purposes. Visitors are requested to note that the information is intended to be correct, complete, and up-to-date. Juris Corp does not warrant that the information contained on this website is accurate or complete, and disclaims any and all liability to any person for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or any other cause.

This website is not intended to be a source of advertising or solicitation. The reader must not consider the information contained herein to be an invitation for a lawyer-client relationship, must not rely on information provided herein and must seek independent advice. Transmission, receipt or use of any information on this website does not constitute or create a lawyer-client relationship. No recipients of content from this website should act or refrain from acting, based upon any or all of the contents of this website.

Furthermore, Juris Corp does not wish to represent anyone desiring representation based solely upon viewing this web site. Finally, the reader is warned that the use of e-mail for confidential or sensitive information is susceptible to inherent risks of lack of confidentiality associated with sending e-mail over the internet.

By clicking on the "I understand and agree" button below, the user acknowledges that:

  • This website is not a mode of advertisement, promotion, personal communication, or solicitation of any sort whatsoever and the user wishes to gain information about us for his/her own reasons;
  • Entering into this website does not establish a lawyer-client relationship.

We are not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on information provided under this website. In cases where the user has any legal issues, he/she must seek independent legal advice.

JC - Article - Proceeds from avoidance transactions must enure to the benefit of company’s creditors: NCLAT


29 Jan 2022

Proceeds from avoidance transactions must enure to the benefit of company’s creditors: NCLAT

The outcome of the avoidance transactions under Section 66 of the I&B Code, 2016 (“Code”) cannot be given to the successful resolution applicant (“SRA”) and it must go to the company's creditors as per the prevailing practice in other countries such as US, UK. In other words, there should not be any unjust enrichment at the cost of lakhs of creditors of the company whose money has been defrauded by the Corporate Debtor's promoters.

This has been ruled by the NCLAT, New Delhi vide its judgment dated 27th January 2022 in the matter of Roopjyot Engineering Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. The Administrator of DHFL & Ors. and other connected matters.

It was further noted that the phrase "in relation to a person who is a creditor of the Corporate Debtor" and the other expression "shall rank in the order of priority of payment under Section 53" occurring in Section 67(2) of the Code indicate that recoveries from avoidance transaction should be distributed among the creditors in order of priority given under Section 53 of the Code. The Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) cannot exercise its discretion to negotiate the terms against the statutory provision of the Code.

On the aspect of the Adjudicating Authority’s judicial review power, it was observed that the Tribunal is under a legal and statutory duty to enquire whether a Resolution Plan suffers from any illegality or otherwise contains unlawful terms. The said duty is not eclipsed by the manner of voting by a particular creditor or a class of creditors. Even in the absence of any person pointing out any illegality in a resolution plan, the Tribunal is expected to exercise its powers to enquire whether the requirements of Section 30(2) of the Code have been met. In view thereof, the Adjudicating Authority ought to have decided whether the recoveries vested with the Corporate Debtor should be applied for the benefit of its creditors, the SRA or other stakeholders by taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and other factors.

Thus, the Appellate Tribunal set aside the term in the Resolution Plan which permits the SRA to appropriate recoveries from avoidance applications and remitted the matter back to the CoC for reconsideration on this aspect.

Juris Corp represented NCD Holders, being the Appellants, in the appeal filed before the NCLAT.


For any further information, please contact Mr. Shubhabrata Chakraborti (shubhabrata.chakraborti@jclex.com) or Mr. Dhruv Malik (dhruv.malik@jclex.com).