000			04237nam a2200181Ia 4500
999			_c207693 _d207693
003			OSt
005			20210720114550.0
008			210206s2020 xx 000 0 und
040			_c.
100			_aShreya
245		3	_aAn Analysis of Behavioural Impact of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on Key Stakeholders
260			_aBangalore _bNLSIU _c2020
300			_a78p.
505			_aTABLE 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 .
700			_aProf. (Dr.) O. V. Nandimath - Guide
856			_uhttp://opac.nls.ac.in:8081/xmlui/handle/123456789/423
942			_cDIS _2ddc