Photo of Shivam Tiwari

Associate in the Dispute Resolution practice at the Delhi office of Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas. Shivam’s areas of focus include arbitration and pre-arbitration litigation, family law, constitutional challenges, and insolvency. He can be reached at

‘Quasi-judicial’ role of liquidators in treating disputed claims under the IBC

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) is silent on the treatment of a disputed or contingent claim, which is pending adjudication before a judicial or quasi-judicial body, giving rise to a contentious issue. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel Limited v. Satish Kumar Gupta[1] brought some clarity vis-à-vis the status of the contingent/ disputed claims for the corporate insolvency resolution process (“CIRP”). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Essar Steel (supra) upheld a resolution plan, wherein a contingent claim pending adjudication was accorded a notional value of INR 1/-. Subsequently, it became an accepted norm for Resolution Professionals (“RP”) to admit claims that are sub-judice, at a notional value of INR 1/. Though this answers the question of how undisputed claims must be treated by the RP, the Essar judgment also leaves a few issues open to interpretation. Continue Reading ‘Quasi-judicial’ role of liquidators in treating disputed claims under the IBC