The “Ordinary Course of Business” exception in preferential transactions – Deciphering the interpretation methodology

Blog Post:

The concept of avoidance of preferential transactions under Section 43 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”), is based on the principle that insolvency is a collective scheme process and that the assets of a corporate debtor (“CD”) are distributed equitably in a liquidation scenario. During the twilight period of insolvency, paying off one creditor selectively can be disadvantageous to the interests of other stakeholders/creditors as transferring certain assets/monies diminishes the CD’s value. To reverse/avoid such preferential transactions, Section 43(1) of the Code empowers the resolution professional (“RP”) or the liquidator to approach the jurisdictional National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”). As per Section 43(2), a CD shall be deemed to have been given “preference” if the CD’s transfer of property benefits any creditor on account of any pre-existing debt owed by the CD and such a transfer puts the creditor into a beneficial position than it would have had the assets been distributed in a liquidation scenario. One of the two exclusions Section 43(3) lays down two exceptions from the trappings of the deeming fiction of preferential transactions one of them being “transfers made in the ordinary course of business or financial affairs of the corporate debtor or the transferee” (the “OCOB Exception”)[1].Continue Reading The “Ordinary Course of Business” exception in preferential transactions – Deciphering the interpretation methodology

Promoter’s Liability for Joint Development Projects: Consideration Received by one cannot absolve the other from joint liability to refund

In a recent landmark ruling of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (“BHC”) in the matter of Wadhwa Group Housing Private Limited (“Appellant”) vs. Vijay Choksi and Ors., it has been inter-alia held that a promoter of a joint development project, who has not received any consideration from the allottee of an apartment coming to the share of another promoter, is jointly obligated to refund that consideration with interest under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA Act”). The Hon’ble Supreme Court has vide its order dated April 8, 2024 declined to entertain a special leave petition which was filed by the Appellant challenging the aforesaid judgement of the BHC.Continue Reading Promoter’s Liability for Joint Development Projects: Consideration Received by one cannot absolve the other from joint liability to refund