Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC): The judgment extensively discusses various sections of the IBC. Section 5 is mentioned in the context of the Directorate of Enforcement attaching assets under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Section 12 is discussed at length regarding the time limit for completion of the insolvency resolution process, including the impact of amendments and the mandatory nature of the timelines. The judgment refers to "12. Time-limit for completion of insolvency resolution process. (1) Subject to sub-section (2), the corporate insolvency resolution process shall be completed within a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of admission of the application to initiate such process." Section 17 is mentioned in relation to the duties of the Interim Resolution Professional. Section 20 discusses the Interim Resolution Professional's duty to protect the Corporate Debtor's value. Section 24 is mentioned in the context of the conduct of Committee of Creditors (CoC) meetings. Section 25 discusses the duties of the Resolution Professional. Section 29A is discussed in detail, focusing on the eligibility criteria for submitting a resolution plan and the mandatory disclosure requirements. The judgment notes, "As per Section 29A, a person shall not be eligible to submit a Resolution Plan, if such person or any other person acting jointly or in concert with such person, falls under any of the clauses contained in the said Section 29A." Section 30 is discussed in relation to the requirements for a resolution plan, including the payment of insolvency resolution process costs and the treatment of operational creditors. The judgment refers to "Section 30(2) after the receipt of the Resolution Plans from the Prospective Resolution Applicants, is to examine each of such Resolution Plans and confirm that each Resolution Plan provided for the payment of Insolvency Resolution Process costs in the manner specified by the Board in priority to the payment of other debts of the Corporate Debtor". Section 31 is discussed in relation to the approval of the resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority and its binding effect on all stakeholders. The judgment refers to "Section 31(1), the Adjudicating Authority is empowered to approve only such Resolution Plan approved by the Committee of Creditors under sub-section (4) of Section 30, which meets the requirements as referred to in sub-section (2) of Section 30." Section 32A is discussed in the context of the liability of a Corporate Debtor for offenses committed prior to the commencement of CIRP and the powers of the Directorate of Enforcement. The judgment refers to "Section 32A(1)(2), the Directorate of Enforcement/Investigating Agencies did not have the powers to attach assets of Corporate Debtor, once the Resolution Plan had stood approved". Section 33 is discussed in relation to liquidation proceedings. Section 60(5) is mentioned regarding questions of law or fact arising out of or in relation to insolvency resolution. Section 61 is discussed in relation to appeals to the NCLAT and the grounds for such appeals, particularly concerning orders approving a resolution plan. The judgment refers to "Section 61(3) of the IBC are the only grounds available to the NCLAT for setting aside the approval of the Resolution Plan". Section 62 is discussed in relation to appeals to the Supreme Court. Section 74(3) is mentioned regarding penalties for contravention of the terms of the approved Resolution Plan.
CIRP Regulations, 2016: The judgment discusses several regulations under the CIRP Regulations, 2016. Regulation 37 is mentioned in relation to the measures a Resolution Plan shall provide for the Insolvency Resolution of the Corporate Debtor for maximisation of value of its assets. Regulation 38 is discussed extensively regarding the mandatory contents of a resolution plan, including the priority of payments to operational creditors and the inclusion of a statement on how the plan deals with the interests of all stakeholders. The judgment refers to "Regulation 38(1) was amended from time to time and lastly by Notification dated 27.11.2019, the relevant part thereof reads as under: "38(1) Mandatory contents of Resolution Plan:- (1) The amount payable under a resolution plan (a) to the operational creditors shall be paid in priority over financial creditors". Regulation 39(1) is mentioned in relation to the requirement for a Resolution Applicant to submit a Resolution Plan along with an affidavit stating that he is eligible under Section 29A. Regulation 39(4) is mentioned in relation to the submission of the Resolution Plan by the Resolution Professional along with a compliance certificate in Form No. H of the Schedule. Regulation 40A is mentioned in relation to the timeline for submitting the Resolution Plan to the Adjudicating Authority.
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA): The judgment discusses Section 5 of the PMLA in the context of the Directorate of Enforcement's power to provisionally attach assets. The judgment refers to "Section 5 of PMLA. The SRA-JSW challenged the powers of ED to pass Provisional Attachment Order by raising an issue in the Appeal being Company Appeal No. 957 of 2019 pending before the NCLAT." Section 2(1)(u) is mentioned in the context of defining proceeds of crime. Section 8(8) is mentioned in the context of restitution. Rule 3A of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Restoration of Property) Rules, 2016 is also mentioned.
Constitution of India, 1949: Article 142 is mentioned in relation to the Supreme Court's power to exercise jurisdiction. The judgment refers to "Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Adjudicating Authority i.e. the NCLT is directed to initiate the Liquidation Proceedings against the Corporate Debtor-BPSL under Chapter III of the IBC and in accordance with law."
Companies Act, 2013: Sections 408 and 410 are mentioned in relation to the constitution of the NCLT and NCLAT.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 49 is mentioned in the context of categorizing the Appellant Jaldhi Overseas as an Operational Creditor with a contingent claim.
Banking Regulation Act, 1949: The judgment mentions that the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 was amended w.e.f. 04.05.2017, to enable the RBI to issue directions to the Indian Banks to mandatorily initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (for short CIRP).