The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) is a structured, time-bound mechanism under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. It enables financially distressed companies or their creditors to initiate insolvency resolution with the primary objective of maximizing asset value and safeguarding the interests of all stakeholders. The process is designed to provide a unified framework for dealing with corporate insolvency, ensuring predictability and transparency in the resolution process.
Objectives and Scope of CIRP
The primary objective of CIRP is to resolve corporate insolvency in a timely manner to prevent further value erosion. Prior to the enactment of IBC, companies in financial distress had to rely on outdated frameworks like SICA or wait for their accounts to be classified as Non-Performing Assets (NPA) after 90 days of default. The IBC introduced a significant shift by making payment default of Rs. 1 crore (earlier Rs. 1 lakh) the threshold for initiating insolvency proceedings. This removed unnecessary delays and allowed creditors to act swiftly to protect their interests.
Unlike previous laws, IBC applies to all business enterprises, whether industrial or service-oriented. It ensures that every creditor, whether financial or operational, has the legal right to seek resolution of unpaid debts through a structured judicial process. CIRP not only facilitates recovery but also promotes the rehabilitation of viable businesses.
Eligibility to Initiate CIRP
Section 6 of the IBC specifies who can initiate CIRP. The following parties are eligible:
- Financial Creditors
- Operational Creditors
- The Corporate Debtor itself
Additionally, homebuyers are recognized as financial creditors, a position confirmed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018. The Supreme Court, in Pioneer Urban Land Infrastructure Ltd. v. Union of India, upheld this recognition, thereby expanding the scope of stakeholders empowered to initiate CIRP.
Initiation of CIRP by Financial Creditors (Section 7)
A Financial Creditor is defined under Section 5(7) as a person to whom a financial debt is owed, including those who have legally acquired or been assigned the debt. Financial debt, as per Section 5(8), includes borrowings, bonds, debentures, finance leases, and other financial obligations involving consideration for the time value of money.
To initiate CIRP, a Financial Creditor must establish a default of Rs. 1 crore or above. This process is neutral to whether the creditor holds a secured or unsecured claim. The application has to be filed in the prescribed format under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016, along with a fee of Rs. 25,000.
The application must contain the following information:
- Details of the applicant Financial Creditor(s)
- Particulars of the Corporate Debtor
- Details of the proposed Interim Resolution Professional (IRP)
- Particulars of the financial debt, including supporting contracts and documentation
- Evidence of security interests, if any
- Record of default from Information Utilities or Credit Information Companies
- Consent of the proposed IRP
While Section 7 does not mandate issuing a notice to the Corporate Debtor before filing the application, Rule 4(3) requires dispatching a copy of the application to the Corporate Debtor and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI). In the case of Sree Metaliks Ltd. v. Union of India, the Calcutta High Court held that the principles of natural justice necessitate providing the Corporate Debtor an opportunity to be heard before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).
Initiation of CIRP by Operational Creditors (Section 9)
An Operational Creditor, as defined in Section 5(20), is any person to whom an operational debt is owed, including legal assignees or transferees. Section 5(21) defines operational debt as a claim arising from the supply of goods or services, employment dues, or statutory liabilities payable to government authorities.
The process for Operational Creditors begins with serving a demand notice in Form 3, as prescribed under Rule 5(1)(a) of the Application Rules. The notice must include:
- The total amount of debt
- The amount of debt in default
- Security details, if any
- Retention of title arrangements, if applicable
- Records of default from Information Utilities
- Legal provisions under which the debt is owed
A filing fee of Rs. 2,000 is applicable. Upon receipt of the demand notice, the Corporate Debtor has 10 days to either repay the debt or notify the Operational Creditor of an existing dispute. If no response is received, or if payment is not made, the Operational Creditor can file an application under Section 9 to initiate CIRP.
The interpretation of ‘dispute’ under Section 8 was clarified by the Supreme Court in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. v. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd. The Court ruled that the existence of a genuine dispute, even if no litigation has been initiated, is a valid defense against CIRP initiation under Section 9. The dispute must be real and not fabricated or illusory.
Initiation of CIRP by Corporate Debtor (Section 10)
The Corporate Debtor itself, through its authorized representatives, can voluntarily initiate CIRP upon default. Section 5(5) defines a corporate applicant to include the Corporate Debtor, its authorized partners or members, and individuals responsible for managing financial operations.
The application must be filed in Form 6 under Rule 7(1) of the Application Rules, with a filing fee of Rs. 25,000. The following documents are required:
- Financial records, including books of accounts
- Details of the proposed Interim Resolution Professional
- Shareholders’ special resolution or partners’ resolution approving the application
The Adjudicating Authority must admit the application within 14 days if it is complete and the proposed IRP has no pending disciplinary actions. The application can be rejected if it is incomplete, fraudulent, or if the applicant is ineligible under Section 11.
Section 11 bars the following from initiating CIRP:
- Corporate Debtors already undergoing CIRP
- Corporate Debtors who completed CIRP within the last 12 months
- Applicants who have violated terms of a previously approved resolution plan
- Corporate Debtors against whom a liquidation order has been passed
Classification of Creditors under IBC
Section 5(7) defines a Financial Creditor as any entity to whom a financial debt is owed. Financial debt includes loans, bonds, debentures, lease obligations, securitized receivables, derivative transactions, and obligations under guarantees or indemnities.
An Operational Creditor, under Section 5(20), is an entity to whom an operational debt is owed. Operational debt includes claims from supply of goods and services, employment dues, and statutory obligations.
The term ‘Other Creditors’ is not specifically defined, but Sections 3(10), 3(11), and 3(6) offer a broad interpretation of creditors and claims. Any person who holds a right to payment or remedy, whether the debt is financial or operational, falls under the ambit of ‘creditor’.
In Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld the distinction between Financial and Operational Creditors, ruling that the classification was based on legitimate commercial rationale. The Court observed that Financial Creditors are typically involved in assessing the viability of a business and play a crucial role in the resolution process. In contrast, Operational Creditors often lack the financial expertise to evaluate the long-term viability of the debtor’s business.
The Supreme Court also addressed the role of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in the distribution of resolution proceeds in Essar Steel Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta. The Court ruled that the CoC’s commercial wisdom in approving resolution plans, including the distribution mechanism, cannot be interfered with by NCLT or NCLAT, provided the plan meets the requirements of the Code.
Legal Framework and Procedural Regulations
The initiation of CIRP by Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors, and Corporate Debtors is governed by Sections 6 to 32 of Chapter II, Part II of the IBC. The procedural aspects of filing applications are outlined in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. These rules prescribe the formats for applications, notices, and the supporting documents required.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has also issued the Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons Regulations, 2016. These regulations govern the conduct of CIRP post-admission, including procedures for public announcements, verification of claims, formation of the Committee of Creditors (CoC), CoC meetings, voting procedures, insolvency resolution costs, and the preparation and approval of resolution plans.
Additionally, IBBI has established regulations for the registration and oversight of insolvency professionals, insolvency professional agencies, and Information Utilities. These frameworks ensure that the CIRP is conducted in a professional, transparent, and efficient manner.
Application Formats for Initiating CIRP
The following forms are prescribed under the Application Rules for initiating CIRP:
- Form 1: Application by Financial Creditor under Rule 4
- Form 2: Written Consent by Proposed IRP under Rule 9
- Form 3: Demand Notice by Operational Creditor under Rule 5(1)(a)
- Form 4: Invoice Notice under Rule 5(1)(b)
- Form 5: Application by Operational Creditor under Rule 6
- Form 6: Application by Corporate Debtor under Rule 7
The prescribed forms standardize the process of initiating CIRP, ensuring consistency and compliance with procedural requirements. These formats detail the necessary information and documentation, enabling the Adjudicating Authority to process applications efficiently.
Introduction to CIRP Post-Admission
Once the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) admits a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) application, the resolution process enters a structured framework of timelines and obligations. The process aims to resolve insolvency within 180 days, extendable by 90 days, subject to specific conditions.
This stage involves the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), public announcements to invite claims, verification of claims, formation of the Committee of Creditors (CoC), and the formulation of a resolution plan.
Appointment and Role of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP)
Upon admission of the CIRP application, the Adjudicating Authority appoints an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) within 14 days. The IRP plays a pivotal role in managing the affairs of the Corporate Debtor during the moratorium period. The IRP is appointed based on the consent provided in the application forms submitted by Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors, or Corporate Debtors.
Duties and Responsibilities of the IRP
The IRP is entrusted with the following responsibilities:
- Taking control and custody of the Corporate Debtor’s assets, records, and financial documents.
- Making a public announcement inviting claims from all creditors within 3 days of appointment.
- Collating and verifying claims received from Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors, and other stakeholders.
- Constituting the Committee of Creditors (CoC) based on verified claims.
- Ensuring that the Corporate Debtor continues as a going concern and managing its operations during the CIRP.
The IRP operates under the regulatory oversight of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and is obligated to adhere to strict timelines.
Public Announcement and Claims Verification
Public Announcement
Within three days of appointment, the IRP must issue a public announcement in newspapers and on the IBBI website. This announcement serves to inform all creditors about the initiation of CIRP and invites them to submit their claims within a specified timeframe, usually 14 days.
Verification of Claims
Once claims are received, the IRP undertakes a thorough verification process. Financial Creditors are required to submit proof of claims in Form C, Operational Creditors in Form B, and Workmen and Employees in Form D. The IRP verifies these claims by cross-referencing available records, contracts, and entries in Information Utilities.
Disputes regarding claims are resolved through documentation and communication with claimants. Upon completion of the verification process, the IRP prepares a list of admitted claims, which forms the basis for the formation of the CoC.
Formation of the Committee of Creditors (CoC)
The Committee of Creditors (CoC) is a central decision-making body in the CIRP. It comprises all Financial Creditors whose claims have been admitted. In cases where the Corporate Debtor has no Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors with admitted claims take part in the CoC.
Composition and Voting Share
The voting share of each creditor is proportionate to their admitted claim amount. Secured and unsecured Financial Creditors are treated equally in terms of voting rights, though their interests may be considered differently in resolution plans.
The IRP convenes the first meeting of the CoC within seven days of its constitution. In this meeting, the CoC may either confirm the IRP as the Resolution Professional (RP) or replace the IRP with another RP.
Declaration of Moratorium
With the admission of CIRP, the Adjudicating Authority declares a moratorium, which remains in effect until the completion of the process or approval of a resolution plan. The moratorium prohibits:
- Institution or continuation of suits or proceedings against the Corporate Debtor.
- Transfer, encumbrance, or disposal of Corporate Debtor’s assets.
- Foreclosure, recovery, or enforcement of security interests by creditors.
- Termination of essential goods or services to the Corporate Debtor.
The moratorium aims to maintain the status quo and prevent value erosion of the Corporate Debtor’s assets, enabling a conducive environment for resolution.
Preparation of Information Memorandum
One of the key responsibilities of the RP (or IRP, if continued) is the preparation of an Information Memorandum (IM). The IM is a comprehensive document containing critical information about the Corporate Debtor’s financial position, assets, liabilities, operations, and other relevant data.
The Information Memorandum serves as a foundation for potential Resolution Applicants (RAs) to conduct due diligence and prepare resolution plans. The IM must include:
- List of assets and liabilities
- Financial statements
- Details of creditors and their claims
- Operational data, including business plans
- Litigation pending against the Corporate Debtor
- Other material information necessary for valuation and resolution
Invitation of Resolution Plans
After preparing the IM, the RP invites expressions of interest (EOIs) from prospective Resolution Applicants (RAs). The invitation is made through a public announcement, providing eligibility criteria, submission timelines, and other relevant conditions.
Once EOIs are received, the RP evaluates applicants against eligibility norms specified under Section 29A of the IBC, which disqualifies certain categories of applicants such as wilful defaulters, related parties, and persons convicted of offenses.
Eligible applicants are then provided with access to the Information Memorandum and other relevant documents for due diligence. The applicants submit their resolution plans within the specified deadline.
Evaluation of Resolution Plans by CoC
The RP places all compliant resolution plans before the CoC for evaluation. The CoC evaluates the plans based on feasibility, viability, and the ability to maximize value for all stakeholders. The RP may assist the CoC in this process by providing professional insights and comparisons among different plans.
The CoC holds discussions, negotiates with Resolution Applicants, and may suggest modifications to improve the plans. The plan that receives the approval of at least 66% of the voting share of CoC members is considered approved.
Submission of Approved Plan to Adjudicating Authority
Once the CoC approves a resolution plan, the RP submits it to the Adjudicating Authority for final approval. The NCLT examines the plan to ensure compliance with IBC provisions, including:
- The plan addresses payment to Operational Creditors in a manner not less than the liquidation value.
- It includes provisions for effective implementation.
- The plan is not in contravention of any law in force.
- It adequately protects the interests of all stakeholders.
The Adjudicating Authority may approve the plan if satisfied or reject it if it finds material non-compliance.
Liquidation in Case of Non-Approval
If no resolution plan is received within the stipulated time (180 days extendable by 90 days), or if the CoC rejects all plans, or if the Adjudicating Authority rejects the approved plan, the Corporate Debtor enters liquidation.
The liquidation order results in the appointment of a Liquidator, who may or may not be the RP. The Liquidator assumes control of the Corporate Debtor’s assets, which are then sold to realize value for distribution among creditors as per the liquidation waterfall defined under Section 53 of the IBC.
Role of Information Utilities (IUs)
Information Utilities play a critical role in enhancing the efficiency and transparency of the CIRP. They serve as electronic repositories of financial information, including records of debts, defaults, and security interests.
Creditors and Corporate Debtors are encouraged to file and verify financial information with IUs. This aids in expediting claim verification, reducing disputes, and providing authentic evidence of default.
The Adjudicating Authority relies on IU records to ascertain defaults, thereby simplifying the admission process for CIRP applications.
Powers and Functions of the Committee of Creditors (CoC)
The Committee of Creditors wields significant authority in the CIRP process. Apart from approving resolution plans, the CoC has the power to:
- Appoint or replace the Resolution Professional
- Approve essential business decisions such as raising interim finance
- Decide on matters related to the operations of the Corporate Debtor
- Extend the CIRP timeline within statutory limits
The CoC’s decisions are guided by commercial wisdom, which is given primacy under the IBC. Judicial bodies are generally restrained from interfering with CoC’s commercial decisions, as emphasized by the Supreme Court in various judgments.
Challenges in CIRP Execution
Despite its robust legal framework, CIRP faces several practical challenges:
- Delays in appointment of IRP/RP by Adjudicating Authorities.
- Disputes over claim verification and prioritization among creditors.
- Resistance from promoters and management in cooperating with IRP/RP.
- Legal challenges against moratorium and asset control.
- Difficulty in attracting resolution applicants for companies with poor financial health.
To address these challenges, continuous efforts are made to streamline processes, enhance the role of Information Utilities, and promote professional conduct among insolvency professionals.
Role of Insolvency Professionals and Regulatory Oversight
Insolvency Professionals (IPs) are licensed practitioners regulated by IBBI. Their conduct is governed by the IBBI (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016. IPs are expected to exercise diligence, maintain independence, and adhere to ethical standards while discharging their responsibilities.
The IBBI also oversees Insolvency Professional Agencies (IPAs), which are responsible for enrolling and monitoring IPs. Regular inspections, audits, and disciplinary proceedings ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.
Extension of CIRP Timeline
While the statutory period for completing CIRP is 180 days, the CoC may file an application for a one-time extension of up to 90 days. However, the entire process, including extension, must conclude within 330 days, inclusive of time taken for litigation.
If CIRP is not concluded within this timeline, the Corporate Debtor is mandatorily subjected to liquidation proceedings.
Approval and Implementation of Resolution Plans
Once a resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with the requisite majority of 66%, it is submitted to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) for final approval. The NCLT examines whether the resolution plan meets the mandatory requirements stipulated under Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
Conditions for Approval of Resolution Plans by NCLT
The resolution plan must:
- Provide for payment of insolvency resolution process costs in priority over other payments.
- Ensure that Operational Creditors are paid at least the amount they would receive in liquidation.
- Detail the management and control of the Corporate Debtor after resolution.
- Be feasible, viable, and compliant with existing laws.
- Not contravene any provisions of the law in force.
If the NCLT is satisfied that these conditions are met, it approves the plan, making it binding on the Corporate Debtor, its employees, members, creditors, guarantors, and other stakeholders. Once approved, the Resolution Applicant must implement the plan as per the terms specified.
Binding Effect and Legal Consequences
The approval of a resolution plan has significant legal consequences:
- All existing liabilities and obligations of the Corporate Debtor are settled as per the terms of the resolution plan.
- Legal proceedings pending against the Corporate Debtor concerning debts covered under the plan are extinguished.
- Guarantees provided by promoters or related parties for debts resolved under the plan are subject to specific provisions of the resolution.
The Supreme Court in the case of Essar Steel emphasized that upon approval of a resolution plan, all claims stand frozen and are dealt with in accordance with the resolution plan.
Role of Monitoring Committee
In several cases, a Monitoring Committee is constituted to oversee the implementation of the resolution plan. This Committee ensures that the Resolution Applicant fulfills its obligations within stipulated timelines. The Monitoring Committee may comprise representatives of the CoC, the Resolution Professional, and members nominated by the Resolution Applicant.
Distribution of Resolution Proceeds
The IBC establishes a clear hierarchy for distribution of proceeds under a resolution plan. The waterfall mechanism, though primarily applicable in liquidation, serves as a guiding principle for equitable distribution under a resolution plan. The key priorities are:
- Insolvency Resolution Process Costs
- Secured Financial Creditors
- Unsecured Financial Creditors
- Operational Creditors
- Employees and Workmen dues
- Government dues
The CoC retains the commercial discretion to determine distribution proportions among different classes of creditors, subject to the minimum payment thresholds prescribed by the Code.
Treatment of Dissenting Financial Creditors
Dissenting Financial Creditors are those who vote against the resolution plan or abstain from voting. The IBC ensures that such creditors receive at least the amount they would be entitled to in the event of liquidation.
The Supreme Court in Essar Steel clarified that while dissenting creditors must be paid liquidation value, the distribution of surplus proceeds lies within the CoC’s commercial discretion, and NCLT or NCLAT cannot interfere with such decisions.
Time-Bound Completion of CIRP
The CIRP must be completed within 180 days from the admission of the application. The timeline can be extended by 90 days with CoC approval, but the entire process must conclude within 330 days, including litigation periods. Failure to resolve within this timeline results in the Corporate Debtor being subjected to liquidation.
Liquidation Process Under IBC
If the CIRP fails to result in an approved resolution plan, the Adjudicating Authority passes a liquidation order. Liquidation entails the following steps:
- Appointment of a Liquidator (often the existing RP)
- Formation of a liquidation estate comprising all assets of the Corporate Debtor
- Realization of assets through sale or other means
- Distribution of proceeds as per the liquidation waterfall defined in Section 53 of the IBC
The liquidation process is more rigid and focuses solely on value realization through asset disposal, unlike CIRP, which seeks revival and continuity of business operations.
Fast Track CIRP
The IBC provides for a Fast Track CIRP under Section 55, applicable to certain categories of Corporate Debtors such as small companies, startups, or unlisted companies with limited assets and liabilities. The Fast Track process aims to conclude insolvency resolution within 90 days, extendable by 45 days.
Cross-Border Insolvency Framework
While the IBC currently lacks a comprehensive cross-border insolvency regime, Section 234 and 235 empower the Central Government to enter into reciprocal agreements with foreign countries for cooperation in insolvency proceedings. The Indian judiciary has adopted a pragmatic approach, recognizing foreign insolvency proceedings under principles of comity and cooperation.
Efforts are underway to adopt the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency to provide a structured legal framework.
Recent Amendments and Regulatory Developments
The IBC framework is continually evolving through legislative amendments, regulatory updates by IBBI, and judicial pronouncements. Key amendments include:
- Introduction of pre-packaged insolvency resolution process (PPIRP) for MSMEs
- Increasing the default threshold for initiation of CIRP to ₹1 crore
- Enhanced role of Information Utilities for record verification
- Clarifications on treatment of homebuyers as Financial Creditors
These reforms aim to streamline processes, reduce frivolous litigation, and protect the interests of stakeholders.
Role of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT)
NCLT is the primary Adjudicating Authority for CIRP applications, while appeals against NCLT orders lie with the NCLAT. Both tribunals play a crucial role in ensuring the effective enforcement of IBC provisions.
NCLT’s functions include:
- Admission or rejection of CIRP applications
- Approving or rejecting resolution plans
- Passing liquidation orders
- Adjudicating disputes arising during CIRP
NCLAT hears appeals on NCLT’s orders, and further appeals lie before the Supreme Court on questions of law.
Judicial Pronouncements Shaping CIRP
The judiciary has significantly influenced the interpretation and application of IBC provisions. Landmark cases include:
Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
This judgment upheld the constitutionality of IBC’s classification of Financial and Operational Creditors, emphasizing the importance of CoC’s commercial wisdom.
Essar Steel India Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta
The Supreme Court reinforced the supremacy of CoC in determining the distribution of resolution proceeds and held that judicial bodies cannot interfere with CoC’s commercial decisions.
Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. v. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd.
This judgment clarified the scope of pre-existing disputes in Section 9 applications filed by Operational Creditors and set standards for evaluating the genuineness of disputes.
Pioneer Urban Land Infrastructure Ltd. v. Union of India
The Court upheld the amendment recognizing homebuyers as Financial Creditors, thus enabling them to initiate CIRP and participate in CoC proceedings.
Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP)
Introduced through the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2021, PPIRP provides a hybrid mechanism combining debtor-initiated restructuring with creditor approval. It is designed for MSMEs with defaults up to ₹1 crore.
Key features include:
- Debtor-in-possession model with oversight by Resolution Professional
- Pre-negotiated resolution plan with creditors
- Reduced timelines for resolution
PPIRP aims to offer a cost-effective and expedited alternative to the standard CIRP framework for small businesses.
Impact of CIRP on Stakeholders
The CIRP framework impacts various stakeholders differently:
- Financial Creditors: Gain a structured mechanism for recovery and asset resolution.
- Operational Creditors: Receive minimum guaranteed payment, though subordinate to Financial Creditors.
- Employees and Workmen: Priority payment of dues enhances their security.
- Shareholders: Face potential dilution of ownership upon approval of a resolution plan.
- Promoters: Lose control of the Corporate Debtor during CIRP, though they may regain management post-resolution in certain cases.
Role of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI)
The IBBI is the apex regulatory body overseeing the implementation of IBC. It frames regulations governing Insolvency Professionals, Information Utilities, and CIRP processes. IBBI’s responsibilities include:
- Conducting examinations and registration of Insolvency Professionals
- Issuing circulars and guidelines for process improvements
- Monitoring performance and conduct of professionals and agencies
- Ensuring data transparency through public disclosures
IBBI also engages in continuous stakeholder consultations to enhance the efficiency and efficacy of insolvency processes.
Emerging Trends and Challenges
While the IBC has significantly improved the insolvency landscape, challenges remain:
- Delays in adjudication due to capacity constraints in NCLT
- Complexities in valuation of distressed assets
- Resistance from promoters leading to litigation
- Balancing interests of Financial and Operational Creditors
To address these challenges, proposals are underway for:
- Establishing dedicated insolvency benches in NCLT
- Streamlining claim verification through technology
- Encouraging pre-insolvency mediation and settlements
- Strengthening the role of Information Utilities
Conclusion
The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, has revolutionized India’s approach to dealing with corporate financial distress. By establishing a comprehensive, creditor-driven framework, the IBC has introduced a structured, time-bound mechanism for resolution that emphasizes maximization of asset value and equitable treatment of all stakeholders. The key shift from erstwhile regimes lies in its ability to trigger insolvency on the occurrence of a default, without the need for classifying an account as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA), thereby facilitating early intervention.
The CIRP process is meticulously detailed, beginning with the eligibility criteria for initiation by Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors, or the Corporate Debtor itself, and extends to the approval and implementation of resolution plans through the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The distinct roles, rights, and obligations of Financial and Operational Creditors are pivotal in balancing the interests of all stakeholders, while judicial pronouncements have reinforced the primacy of the CoC’s commercial wisdom, ensuring minimal judicial interference in business decisions.
The procedural framework, governed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules and IBBI’s regulations, ensures transparency, accountability, and adherence to strict timelines. Additionally, innovations like Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) offer expedited alternatives for MSMEs, reflecting the adaptability of the Code to emerging business needs.
Despite its success, challenges such as delays in adjudication, valuation complexities, and balancing creditor interests persist. However, ongoing reforms, capacity enhancements at NCLT, and the proposed adoption of international best practices such as the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency are poised to strengthen the regime further.
In essence, CIRP under IBC has established a paradigm shift in India’s insolvency ecosystem by fostering a culture of credit discipline, promoting swift resolution over prolonged litigation, and enhancing investor confidence. For stakeholders, a thorough understanding of the CIRP process is imperative to navigate insolvency proceedings effectively, mitigate risks, and leverage opportunities for business revival or value realization.