Post by Bharti Nawlani

🚨 Important NCLAT Ruling for IBC Practitioners! Can a sole creditor hold CIRP hostage by refusing a full settlement? NCLAT New Delhi says — NO! ❌ In Achal Kumar Jindal v. Sanjay Kumar Bhuwalka & Anr. (30.06.2026), a 3-Judge Bench held that: ✅ CIRP commencement depends only on existence of financial debt and default ✅ BUT termination on settlement stands on a completely different footing ✅ Where a sole creditor constituting the one-member CoC unjustifiably refuses to accept full settlement offered by the promoters — CIRP CAN be terminated ⚖️ This ruling is significant because it prevents creditors from misusing CIRP as a recovery tool rather than a resolution mechanism. A timely reminder that IBC is a resolution law — not a recovery law! What are your thoughts on this ruling? Have you faced situations where creditors unreasonably refused settlement? Comment below 👇 #IBC #InsolvencyLaw #NCLAT #CIRP #CorporateLaw #InsolvencyAndBankruptcyCode #LegalUpdate #NCLATRuling #IBC2016 #DelhiLawyer #IBCExpert