This post attempts to highlight the causes and effects of increasing haircuts vis-a-vis the shortfalls in achieving the objectives of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
In this post, the author critically examines the decision of the Hon’ble NCLAT in V. Padmakumar v. Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund & Anr. The author differs from the majority’s widely debated view holding that the reflection of debt in the balance sheet of the Corporate Debtor does not amount to an acknowledgment under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and argues that sole reliance on Section 92 of the Companies Act, 2013 is misplaced and the implication of the balance sheet along with the Directors’ Report and financial statement must be considered holistically.
“Policymakers all over the world fear that this could push large number of companies towards liquidation leaving thousands of workers unemployed and the insolvency courts over-burdened. Therefore, economies around the globe are taking temporary measures to mitigate this crisis and keep the entities afloat.”