Worksheets7. IBC Case Laws - Liquidation
Total questions: 10
Worksheet time: 5mins
Name
Class
Date
1.
What was the main issue involved in Hammerle Textiles Limited Case?
a)
Whether the application filed by the Financial Creditor is under proper authorization?
b)
Whether the Resolution plan which offers lower than the liquidation value can be approved by the Adjudicating Authority.
c)
Whether the Aujudicating Authority is empowered to direct the IBBI and Central Government to initiate action under section 74(3) of the code.
d)
None of the above
2.
The main issue was involved in the matter of M/s. GNB technology (India) private Limited?
a)
Whether the Adjudicating Authority, excercising its inherent powers under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, can pass an order of liquidation under section 33 of the Code without first initiating corporate insolvency resolution process of a corporate debtor and appoint a liquidator?
b)
Whether the costs incurred after approval of resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority during the implementation of plan be paid in priority as corporate insolvency resolution cost or liquidation cost after liquidation has been ordered?
c)
Whether the Resolution Plan submitted by the Resolution Professional after the CIRP period can be considered by the Adjudicating Authority?
d)
All of the Above
3.
What was/were the issue/s in In the matter of Adhunik Metaliks Ltd?
a)
Whether the costs incurred after approval of resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority during the implementation of plan can be paid in priority as corporate insolvency resolution cost or liquidation cost after liquidation has been ordered?
b)
Whether payments to workers and employees during implementation period, after end of corporate insolvency resolution process period and before liquidation period can be paid in priority?
c)
Neither (a) nor (b)
d)
Both (a) and (b)
4.
In which case, the Adjudicating Authority allowed liquidator to proceed with liquidation process by granting the relinquishment of security interest of one secured creditor who was not coming forward with the decision to relinquish or not?
a)
In the matter of Kiran Global Chem Limited
b)
In the matter of Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd.
c)
Indus Biotech Private Limited Vs. Kotak India Venture Fund-I
d)
In the matter of Tax Recovery Officer 4 & Anr
5.
In which of the following case an issue had arisen that,"Whether the Appellant, who is a 'Secured Financial Creditor' , while opting out of Liquidation process under Section 52(1)(b) of the 'I&B' Code' is barred from selling the secured assets to the 'promoters' or its related party or the persons who are ineligible in terms of Section 29A of the I&B Code?
a)
SKS Power Generation Chattisgarh Ltd. V Nagarajan (in the matter of M/s Cethar Ltd. & Ors.)
b)
State Bank of India vs Anuj Bajpai (Liquidator)
c)
State bank of india vs. Moser Baer Karamcharo Union & Anr.
d)
Export Import Bank of India & Anr v Astonfield Solar (Gujarat) Pvt Ltd. Anr.
6.
What was the issue involved in Liberty House Group Pte. Ltd. Vs State Bank of India &Ors.?
a)
Whether the Appellant Tribunal can set aside the order of liquidation of a corporate debtor using the powers under Rule 11 of NCLAT Rules,2016?
b)
Whether the Corporate Insolvency resolution process can be accepted project wise in a real estate project?
c)
Whether the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process can take place when financial creditors, operational creditors, secured creditors and unsecured creditors claim are higher than the liquidation value of the assets of the Corporate Debtor?
d)
Whether the Corporate Debtor can sell its assets to maximise the value of the Resolution during the period of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016?
7.
The issue "Whether the provident fund, pension fund and gratuity fund come within the meaning of assets of the Corporate Debtor for distribution under Section 53 of I&B Code" was decided in which case?
a)
Export Import Bank of India & Another Vs. Astonfield Solar (Gujarat) Private Limited & Another
b)
SKS Power Generation Chhattisgarh Limited Vs. V Nagarajan ( in the matter of M/s Cethar Limited Gupta & Others
c)
S.C. Sekran Vs. Amit Gupta & Ors.
d)
State Bank of India Vs. Moser Baer Karamchari Union & Anr.
8.
In which case the Appellate Tribunal held that "while applying Section 53 of the I& B Code ,Section 326 of the Companies Act ,2013 is relevant for the limited purpose of understanding 'workmen's dues' which can be more than provident fund, pension fund and the gratuity fund kept aside protected under Section 36(4) (iii) .
a)
State Bank of India vs Anuj Bajpai ( Liquidator)
b)
Era Infra Engineering Limited Vs. Prideo Commercial Projects Private Limited
c)
Varrsana Ispat Limited Through the Resolution Professional Mr. Anil Goel Vs. Deputy Director , Directorate of Enforcement
d)
State Bank of India Vs. Moser Baer Karamchari Union & Anr.
9.
What was the issue involved before the NCLAT in S.C. Sekaran Vs. Amit Gupta & Ors.
a.Whether the 'Liquidator is to keep companies as 'going concernéven during period of liquidation?
b. Whether the 'Liquidatorçan take steps under section 230 of the Companies Act,2013 after consultation with the 'members' or ''the creditors of the Companies for making arrangement with the third party and thereafter take approval of the 'National Company Law Tribunal'.
c. Whether the order of the Adjudicating Authority directing Liquidation deserves to be set aside?
a)
Both i and ii
b)
Both ii & iii
c)
Only i
d)
all of above
10.
The ratio, that upon receipt of a "rejected resolution plan, the adjudicating authority is not expected to do anything more;nut is obligated to initiate liquidation process Under section 33(1), was laid down by SC in which of following case
a)
Arcellor Mittal India Private limited Vs. Satish Kr. Gupta & Ors
b)
K. Shashidhar Vs. IOB & Ors
c)
Chitra Sharma & Ors Vs. union of India & Ors
d)
COC of Essar Steel Vs. Satish Kr. Gupta
100 %
