Photo of Amey Pathak

Partner in the Projects and Project Finance practice at the Mumbai office of Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Amey specialises in infrastructure projects, projects and banking & financing. He routinely advises key Indian financial institutions, multinational banks and multilateral lending agencies with respect to financing of various infrastructure projects in the airport, power, telecom, oil & gas and road sectors in India.

Amey has been recognized as ‘Leading Lawyer’ for Banking and M&A by IFLR1000, 2016. He can be reached at amey.pathak@cyrilshroff.com

COVID-19 - Its impact on the telecommunications sector in India

As the global economy continues to reel from the shock and the lasting impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak, “work from home” and “social distancing” have become the buzzwords in today’s business landscape, with the telecom sector being the invisible hand driving this shift. Remote working, video conferencing, and telecommunications technology have quickly emerged as key enablers for business operations during this lockdown, and streaming services such as Netflix have become the go to source for entertainment, putting the telecom sector in the spotlight today.

The importance of having a strong telecommunications network during this lockdown has also been acknowledged by the government in the guidelines dated March 24, 2020, issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA)[1], which provides that “telecommunications, internet services, broadcasting and cable services, IT and IT-enabled services (ITeS) only (for essential services)” are the essential services and are exempt from the lockdown. This exemption was also provided in the MHA notification dated April 15, 2020 (which extended the lockdown until May 3, 2020)[2] and in the MHA notification dated May 1, 2020 (which further extended the lockdown for a further period of two weeks).
Continue Reading COVID-19 : Its impact on the telecommunications sector in India

RBI Circular - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Blog

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Limited vs. Union of India is examined herein.

The Supreme Court in Dharani Sugars and Chemicals Limited vs. Union of India & Others (Dharani Sugars) has struck down the circular dated February 12, 2018, containing the revised framework for resolution of stressed assets (RBI Circular) issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on the ground of it being ultra vires Section 35AA of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (Banking Regulation Act).

Section 35AA was introduced by Parliament in 2017 to confer power on Central Government to authorise the RBI to give directions to any bank or banks to initiate an insolvency resolution process under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) in respect of ‘a default’. The RBI Circular was challenged, inter alia, on the basis that Section 35AA does not empower the RBI to issue directions for reference to the IBC of all cases without considering specific defaults.


Continue Reading Dharani Sugars v. Union of India: RBI’s Regulatory Powers Re-affirmed by the Supreme Court

Impact of the Companies (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 on Registration of Charges

On November 2, 2018, the Ministry of Corporate affairs promulgated an ordinance[1] (the Ordinance) inter alia amending certain provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 (the Act). One of the amendments is for the purpose of reducing the extended timelines for filing a charge created by a company as per Section 77(1) of the Act upon payment of additional fees prescribed by the Registrar.
Continue Reading Impact of the Companies (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 on Registration of Charges

Summary of Delhi HC Judgement of 13 3A SARFARESI

Can a secured creditor respond to a representation by a borrower, in response to a notice issued to him under section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), beyond the mandatory period of 15 days (as stipulated under Section 13 (3A) of SARFAESI Act)?
Continue Reading Is the Period of 15 Days Stipulated under Section 13 (3A) of SARFAESI Act to Respond to a Representation by a Borrower Mandatory?