TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ;
I. INTRODUCTION ;
1.1 Statement of Problem ;
1.2 Importance of Study ;
1.3 Aims and Objectives ;
1.4 Hypothesis ;
1.5 Research Questions ;
1.6 Research Methodology ;
1.7 Mode of Citation ;
1.8 Scope and Limitations of the Study ;
1.9 Review of Literature ;
1.9.1 Research Gap ;
1.9.2 Contributions of the Study ;
1.10 Chapter Scheme ;
II. THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE: A ‘LAW AND ECONOMICS’ PERSPECTIVE ;
2.1 An ‘Adjusted’ Form of Efficiency Approach ;
2.2 Combining Efficiency Approach with the Principles of Behavioural Economics;
III. OUTPUTS OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ;
3.1 Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process by Different Stakeholders ;
3.2 Status of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process initiated ;
3.2.1 Time period elapsed since the date of admission of ongoing cases ;
3.2.2 Reasons for Withdrawal of CIRP under Section 12A of the Code ;
3.2.3 Status of Liquidation Process and Reasons for Liquidation ;
3.3 An Analysis of Key Findings ;
IV. BEHAVIOURAL RESPONSES OF KEY STAKEHOLDERS DURING THE CORPORATE INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION PROCESS: CASE STUDIES ;
4.1 Essar Steel Case: Status and Role of Different Stakeholders in the Insolvency Resolution Process ;
4.1.1 Reconciling the Creation of New Classes of Creditors with the Traditional Classification of Secured Creditors and Unsecured Creditors ;
4.1.2 Nature of the Role of the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors ;
4.1.3 Bindingness of Approved Resolution Plan: Incentivizing Resolution Applicants? ;
4.1.4 Sanctity of Statutory Time Period for Completion of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process: The Legislature vs. Adjudicating Authorities ;
4.2. Jaypee Infratech Case: A Critical Appraisal of its Legal and Practical Implications for the Real Estate Sector ;
4.2.1 Obliteration of Raison d'être of Distinction between the Operational and Financial Creditors ;
4.2.2 Probable Misuse of the Code by the Real Estate Allottees: Approach of the Adjudicating Authorities and Need for a Re-look ;
4.2.3 The Supreme Court's Interpretation of Preferential Transactions and its Implications for Third-party Security ;
4.3 Binani Cements Case: A Critical Appraisal of the Justiciability of Approved Resolution Plans ;
4.3.1 Treatment of Operational Creditors and Dissenting Financial Creditors under the Resolution Plan: Role of the Adjudicating Authorities ;
4.3.2 Role of Adjudicating Authorities vis à vis Commercial Wisdom of the Committee of Creditors;
4.4. Amtek Auto Case: Consequences of Non-Implementation of Approved Resolution Plan;
4.4.1 Manner of Pursuing Criminal Complaints under the Code and the Role of Adjudicating Authorities ;
4.4.2 Due Diligence during Distressed Mergers and Acquisitions: Issues and Challenges ;
4.5 An Analysis of the Trends Emerging from the Case Studies ;
4.5.1 The Adjudicating Authorities and the Courts have Tended to Exercise their Authority Improperly. ;
4.5.2 Amendments to the Code are Mostly Case Driven and Lack Conceptual Coherence ;
4.5.3 There are Gaps in the Realisation of Objectives of ‘Speedy Resolution’ and ‘Value Maximisation’ ;
V. REFORMING THE CORPORATE INSOLVENCY FRAMEWORK: CRITIQUES AND PERSPECTIVES ;
5.1 Role of Promoters as Key Stakeholders in the Resolution Process: Is Ineligibility under Section 29A economically efficient? ;
5.2 Schemes of Compromise or Arrangement and Sale on 'Going Concern Basis' in Liquidation: Has the Code ceded its Outcome-neutrality? ;
5.3 Pre-packaged Schemes: Whether Feasible in Indian Insolvency Regime? ;
VI. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS ;
BIBLIOGRAPHY .