Summary: Recent judicial developments in India are reshaping the treatment of homebuyers under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Courts have moved beyond merely recognising homebuyers as financial creditors to substantively distinguishing genuine homebuyers from speculative investors, ensuring the Code is not misused as a recovery tool. While admission into insolvency remains a narrow enquiry of debt and default, broader homebuyer protection is addressed within the resolution process through prospective directions, equitable exceptions for belated claims, and judicial intervention against third-party actions that threaten project viability Alongside, consumer protection remedies under RERA and the Consumer Protection Act continue to offer parallel avenues for redressal. The evolving framework seeks to balance procedural discipline with fairness, ensuring genuine homebuyers are not left without effective remedies.
Continue Reading Homebuyers under the Code: Judicial Calibration Between Protection and ProcessSanctions Compliance Beyond the 50% Rule: A Practical Guide for Indian Businesses
Summary: The 50% ownership rule has always been the cornerstone of sanctions compliance offering apparent certainty to entities navigating complex cross-border transactions. However, in recent years, global regulators have started looking beyond the ownership percentage, scrutinizing effective control and influence to determine sanctions exposure. This piece examines the evolving sanctions landscape across the US, UK & EU and provides Indian businesses with a practical, risk-based compliance framework to align with international enforcement expectations.
Continue Reading Sanctions Compliance Beyond the 50% Rule: A Practical Guide for Indian BusinessesWhere Does Indian Law on Securities Fraud Stand?
Summary: The Securities Appellate Tribunal and Supreme Court recently had the occasion to examine what amounts to securities fraud. While in BDMCL, the SAT examined whether the essential ingredients of fraud were satisfied, in Terrascope, the Supreme Court ruled that false promises in fundraising documents amount to fraud and the same cannot be ratified subsequently by shareholders. Together, these rulings highlight the critical role of transparency and accountability in corporate disclosures.
Continue Reading Where Does Indian Law on Securities Fraud Stand?Statutory Interpretation versus Hierarchical Presumptions: Supreme Court Settles Section 29A Jurisdiction
Summary: The Supreme Court in Jagdeep Chowgule v. Sheela Chowgule resolved conflicting High Court views on whether Section 29A application to extend an arbitral tribunal’s mandate lies before the High Court or the Civil Court. Drawing a clear and principled distinction between appointment jurisdiction and supervisory jurisdiction, it held that jurisdiction under Section 29A
When the Clock Runs Out: The Supreme Court Reaffirms Courts’ Power to Extend Arbitrator’s Mandate Post Award
Summary: The article examines the Indian Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in C. Velusamy v. K. Indhera, which confirms that courts retain the power under Section 29A(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to extend an arbitrator’s mandate even after an award has been passed following the expiry of that mandate. Crucially, the Court clarified that such a post-mandate award is unenforceable, and any extension of the mandate does not validate the defective award. Instead, the tribunal may resume proceedings from the point at which the mandate expired and deliver a fresh, valid award within the extended period. The judgment clarifies that an award delivered after the expiry of mandate of the tribunal is not fatal to the arbitration itself, and procedural steps may be taken to revive and resume the arbitration so that a valid award may be delivered to bring the arbitration to conclusion.
Continue Reading When the Clock Runs Out: The Supreme Court Reaffirms Courts’ Power to Extend Arbitrator’s Mandate Post AwardDoes Interest Stop Running When Award Amounts Are Deposited In Court?
Summary: Recent Indian jurisprudence confirms that depositing an arbitral award amount with the court during Section 34 proceedings stops interest from running, but only if the deposit is full, unconditional, and properly notified. Partial payments made over time do not attract this benefit. This clarity provides judgment debtors with a powerful tool to limit their exposure while awards remain under challengeand gives decree holders certainty about their entitlements.
Continue Reading Does Interest Stop Running When Award Amounts Are Deposited In Court?Bombay High Court Closes the Door on Enforcing Foreign Awards Against Non-Parties
Summary: This article analyses the Bombay High Court’s decision in Ningbo Aux Imp and Exp Co Ltd v. Amstrad Consumer India Pvt Ltd & Anr., which held that enforcement of a foreign arbitral award under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is confined to persons between whom the award was made, and directed deletion of a non-party guarantor from enforcement proceedings. The article also examines the subsequent Section 9 petition, dismissed on the ground that interim measures cannot be directed against a party against whom the award is not enforceable.
Continue Reading Bombay High Court Closes the Door on Enforcing Foreign Awards Against Non-PartiesBlocked at Hormuz: Contractual performance during war
Summary: This article examines the legal principles which allow for discharge of contractual performance, in the context of the ongoing war in West Asia and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
Continue Reading Blocked at Hormuz: Contractual performance during warSupreme Court Gives Insolvency Claims a Fresh Lease of Life: Debt Restructuring and Substantive Compliance
Summary: The recent decision of the Supreme Court in B. Prashanth Hegde v. State Bank of India recognises that an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”), that substantially complies with the requirements cannot be rejected merely due to insignificant errors or omissions. Further, debt restructuring can amount to acknowledgement of debt by the Corporate Debtor, extending the limitation period for filing such an application.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Gives Insolvency Claims a Fresh Lease of Life: Debt Restructuring and Substantive ComplianceSettling The Clash Between The Public Premises Act And State Rent Control Laws
Summary: This article traces the Supreme Court’s resolution of the long-standing conflict between State rent control legislations and the Public Premises Act (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (“PP Act”). In 2014 a division bench of the Supreme Court in Suhas H. Pophale v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and its Estate Officer (2014) 4 SCC 657 created specific carve-outs of a Constitution Bench decision that held the PP Act had overriding effect over State rent control legislation. Following a reference to resolve the conflict, the Supreme Court has, in Life Insurance Corporation of India & Anr. v. Vita, 2025 INSC 1419, settled the position and set aside Suhas Pophale. The ruling restores clarity and marks a significant reaffirmation of stare decisis as a cornerstone of judicial consistency.
Continue Reading Settling The Clash Between The Public Premises Act And State Rent Control Laws