Listen to this post

Does NCLT has power to refer parties to Arbitration in an in rem insolvency proceeding

 

The conflict between Insolvency and Arbitration is almost of near polar extremes. The difference in focus of the two was well illustrated in Re United States Lines Inc[1] as a:

“… conflict of near polar extremes: bankruptcy policy exerts an inexorable pull towards centralization while arbitration policy advocates a decentralized approach towards dispute resolution”.

Thus, while insolvency/ bankruptcy aims to centralise all the proceedings against a debtor to one jurisdiction and give rise to a proceeding in rem (against the world at large) thereby creating third party rights for all creditors of the debtor, arbitration on the other hand advocates a decentralised approach and promotes party autonomy in dispute resolution resulting in a proceeding in personam (against a particular person). Continue Reading Does NCLT has power to refer parties to Arbitration in an in rem insolvency proceeding?

New Remuneration Regime for Independent Directors - Will It help in attracting better talent on the boards of India Inc

Recently, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (‘MCA’) has notified the amendments made to Sections 149(9) and 197(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 (‘2013 Act’) by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2020 (‘2020 Amendment’) -to enable companies faced with absence or inadequacy of profits to pay certain minimum guaranteed remuneration to Non-Executive Directors (‘NEDs’) and Independent Directors (‘IDs’), as may be prescribed. On the same day, the MCA also issued a Notification to amend Schedule V of the 2013 Act to prescribe the scale of remuneration which can be paid to NEDs and IDs, depending on the effective capital of the company. Continue Reading New Remuneration Regime for Independent Directors- Will It help in attracting better talent on the boards of India Inc?

Listen to this post

Dispute mechanism available under a lease

How it started:

It started with the case of Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc v. SBI Home Finance Ltd & Others (“Booz-Allen”), wherein the Supreme Court, after hearing the matter, held that the disputes relating to eviction and tenancy were not arbitrable. Leases are governed under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (“TOPA”). The court discussed the nature and scope of issues arising for consideration in an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (“Act”) wherein “even if there is an arbitration agreement between the parties, and even if the dispute is covered by the arbitration agreement, the court where the civil suit is pending, will refuse an application under Section 8 of the Act, to refer the parties to arbitration, if the subject matter of the suit is capable of adjudication only by a public forum or the relief claimed can only be granted by a special court or Tribunal”. Continue Reading Dispute mechanism available under a lease

Liberalisation of FDI In Insurance Companies – A look at the step(s) taken since the Big Budget Announcement

The industry is now well versed with the move to liberalise foreign direct investment (“FDI”) in Indian insurance companies to 74%, from the existing cap of 49%. The announcement was first made by the Finance Minister Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman on February 1, 2021, as part of her Budget presentation. The move followed the raise in FDI limits to 100% in insurance intermediaries, which was announced by Ms. Sitharaman in July 2019 and effected in September 2019. Continue Reading Liberalisation of FDI In Insurance Companies – A Look at the Step(s) Taken Since the Big Budget Announcement

Pledge of Shares of an Insurance Company - A discussion on IRDAI clarifications

Introduction

We have in our recent post discussed the clarifications issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (“IRDAI”)  in relation to Transfer of Shares of an insurance company. These clarifications were notified pursuant to the circular issued to all CMDs and CEOs of insurance and re-insurance companies on July 22, 2020 (“Circular”). However, the Circular also discussed certain critical issues relating to creation of pledge over shares of an insurance company. Continue Reading Pledge of Shares of an Insurance Company: A discussion on IRDAI clarifications

RBI Payment Regulations - 2009 to 2021 - Bank nodals to PA PG licenses

Introduction:

In early March 2020, a regulatory moratorium imposed on a private bank in India froze the country’s digital payments ecosystem. Many payment aggregators (“PA”) and payment gateways (“PG”) had set up nodal accounts with this bank, including others, and it raised a question on whether the customer funds pooled in those accounts were bankruptcy ‘remote’. Within 10 days, the Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”) issued the payment aggregator and gateway guidelines (“PA/PG Guidelines”) on March 17, 2020, under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 (“PSSA”), to regulate PAs and prescribe baseline technology standards for PAs and PGs. Continue Reading FIG Papers (No. 5 : Series -1) : RBI Payment Regulations – 2009 to 2021: Bank ‘nodals’ to PA/PG licenses! 

LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING A SECTION 34 PETITION BEGINS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE SIGNED COPY OF THE ARBITRAL AWARD

Introduction:

Recently, a division bench of the Supreme Court in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. V. M/s Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd.[1] has inter alia (i) clarified when the limitation period for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”) commences; (ii) discussed the legal requirement and significance of an award being signed; and (iii) highlighted the relevance of dissenting opinions in arbitration proceedings. The Court has also made observations on what happens to the underlying disputes between the parties after an award is set aside. Continue Reading Limitation period for filing a Section 34 Petition begins from the Date of Receipt of the Signed Copy of the Arbitral Award

Indian Mutual Funds – New M&A Rules! Anu Tiwari (Partner), Ritu Sajnani (Senior Associate), Utkarsh Bhatnagar (Senior Associate) and Karthik Koragal (Associate) The Securities Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) carried out a regulatory revamp exercise of SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 (“MF Regulations”) and various circulars issued under it by way of a circular on mutual fund(s) (“MF”) issued on March 4, 2021 (“MF Circular”), effective from March 5, 2021, thereby streamlining a robust regime governing the reporting, compliance and disclosure requirements applicable to asset management company(ies) (“AMC”) and the trustee(s) of such AMCs. Reporting requirements strengthened Currently, the MF Circular requires an AMC to furnish the complete details of any indirect change in its control/ promoters of the sponsor(s) to SEBI and also notify details of a proposed change in control (whether direct or indirect) to the unitholders, by way of an email (in addition to publishing the same in newspapers. Similarly, in case of any proposed change to the fundamental attributes of a MF scheme, trustees are now mandated to obtain comments from SEBI, prior to effectuating such change. With an intent to ensure better compliance, SEBI has also expanded the scope of ‘key personnel’ of an AMC to include chief investment officer, chief risk officer, chief information security officer, chief operation officer, compliance officer, sales head, investor relation officer(s), etc. in addition to the erstwhile list of key personnel, which included the chief executive officer, fund manager(s), dealer(s) and head of other departments of the AMC. Hence, inter alia these new key personnel who are also now prohibited from carrying on self-dealing or front running activities, in addition to meeting the prescribed eligibility criteria. The revised reporting requirements extends SEBI’s regulatory prowess to monitor and bring more transparency in relation to the indirect change in control of the AMCs’ process. Relaxations and scrutiny go hand-in-hand In order to facilitate innovation in the MF space, SEBI has introduced certain relaxations like permitting employees of AMCs to participate in private placement of equity by any company, has allowed trustees to delegate its function(s) to declare/ fix a record date and decide the quantum of dividend, etc. to AMC officials. Further, trustees are now mandated to report to SEBI the MF securities dealt by them, only if a transaction exceeds INR 5 lakhs (vis-a-vis the previous threshold of INR 1 lakh). The regulator has also classified investment in non-convertible preference shares (“NCPSs”) as a ‘debt instrument’ and accordingly, limitation of a MF scheme to invest not more than 10% of its net asset value in debt instruments will also include NCPSs. The trustees now being required to obtain SEBI comments before effecting a ‘change in in the fundamental attributes of a MF scheme’ seems burden-some, as the regulator’s role, and oversight, already guarantees for the requisite checks and balances to govern the MF scheme, including for MF scheme transfers, through separate regulations and circulars in this behalf. Above is likely to add another layer to M&A deal-making, with already many layers involved, impacting deal costs and timelines, especially if a ‘new sponsor’ application may be involved, from a process, governance and unit holders’ standpoint. Albeit above ties into SEBI’s increasing focus on MF trustee’s accountability, which has hitherto been an overlooked area, given the nature and composition of MF trustee boards. Though, done with noble regulatory intent, one would have to see whether the above changes, including expansion of key personnel, further ‘spook’ trustee directors, especially independents - already an onerous position, with few upsides, especially after Calcutta High Court’s Order in the ITC / JPMorgan MF Trustees case, and SEBI’s approach qua Franklin Templeton trustees in 2020, expand the scope of potential SEBI show-cause ‘noticees’ from the current list of 7 (!), and shoot MF M&A in the knees, which was given a new lease of life recently via SEBI dropping the ‘3/ 5’ profitability criterion in Regulation 7, MF Regulations.

The Securities Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) carried out a regulatory revamp exercise of SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 (“MF Regulations”) and various circulars issued under it by way of a circular on mutual fund(s) (“MF”) issued on March 4, 2021 (“MF Circular”), effective from March 5, 2021, thereby streamlining a robust regime governing the reporting, compliance and disclosure requirements applicable to asset management company(ies) (“AMC”) and the trustee(s) of such AMCs. Continue Reading FIG Papers (No.4 : Series – 2): Indian Mutual Funds – New M&A Rules!

Vocal for Local - Overview of the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act 2020

Introduction

The Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Bill, 2020 (“Bill”), which was passed by the Legislative Assembly of Haryana on November 5, 2020, received the assent of the Governor of Haryana on February 26, 2021. The Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 (“Act”), has been published for general information in the extraordinary gazette of Haryana on March 2, 2021, and will come into force, once it is notified by the Government of Haryana (“Haryana Government”). The Act is applicable to (i) all companies, societies, trusts, limited liability partnerships, partnership firms, (ii) persons employing 10 (ten) or more persons and (iii) any entity as may be notified by the Haryana Government and will be operational for a period of 10 (ten) years from the date of its commencement. The Act does not apply to the Central or the State Government or any organisation owned by either of them. The draft rules under the Act are currently awaited. Continue Reading Vocal for Local: Overview of the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020

Transfer of Shares of an Insurance Company - The much-needed clarifications

The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (“IRDAI”) issued a circular (“Circular”) on July 22, 2020 to all CMDs and CEO of insurance and re-insurance companies with a view to bring more clarity on issues relating to the transfer of shares of insurance companies and the creation of pledge over shares of insurance companies Set out below is a brief summary of the clarifications provided by the Circular in relation to transfer of shares of an insurance company:

 A. Clarification on IRDAI’s guidelines for transfer of shares of listed companies Continue Reading Transfer of Shares of an Insurance Company: The much-needed clarifications