<center><b>Southern Region Office Presents)</b></center>
      <center><b> Twin Subject Webinar on )</b></center>
      <center><b> Recent Decisions of the Supreme Court/Tribunals and Appellate Tribunal and Pre-packaged Insolvency Resolution Process under IBC for MSMEs!)</b></center>
      <center><b> 29th May 2021 (11.00 Am to 1.30 Pm)</b></center>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Eminent Speakers</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>1. Chief Justice Shri. MM Kumar - Founder President NCLT.</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>2. Shri. Ritesh Kavdia, Executive Director, Insolvency & Bankruptcy Board of 
      India ( IBBI )</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>3. Shri. Ramji Srinivasan, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>4. Shri. CS Nagendra D Rao, President, Institute of Company Secretaries of 
      India ( ICSI )</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>5. DR K S Ravichandran, Managing Partner, KSR & CO Company Secretaries 
      LLP ( Panel Moderator )</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> 6. Shri. N K Dilip, Partner, TATVA Legal</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>7. Shri. Anil Goel, Chairman/Founder, AAA Insolvency Professionals LLP</b></p>
       <center><b> Welcome Address & Opening Remarks </b></p>
       <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Uma S Nair,</b> Regional Director - Southern Region, ASSOCHAM</p>
       <p><center><b>Theme Address</b></center></p>
       <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> DR K S Ravichandran ASSOCHAM Chairperson </b> for Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code 
      Southern Region and Managing Partner KSR & Co LLP</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'>Try to separate revenues in this Insolvency & Bankruptcy code and also especially with respect to 
      the MSME pre - packaged resolution process so that this will be disseminated across. As we are 
      aware that the economic system has under gone a big change and the question is no longer is 
      defaulter paradise defeated or not default as practice. At the opinion the defaulter paradise has 
      got defeated. The Cedit culture has bought a change, the institution has come on change, everyone
      has contributed to the Judiciary be the duplicating Authority, Regulatory and the professionals. 
      Every agency, every entity in the whole architecture has performed very well and they are bought 
      the dynamic change and dynamism is required in Insolvency resolution because ultimately we are 
      talking about the potential of Economic value and before that the resolution must happen and if 
      it doesn\&apos;t happen of Couse the viable and non-viable can always go for Liquidation. We need to 
      look at this entire code and activities from an economic perspective from judiciary perspective the 
      Corporate Law perspective, Creditors perspective, Professional perspective. The IBC has seen 
      several dynamic disruptive things ever since the comment on 1st December 2016 where IBC came 
      into force and then we saw the first disruptive change on 23rd November 2017, then section 29A 
      was introduced. Thereafter with in another 8 months we saw in 2238 6/6/2018 another very 
      important we saw 2238 limitation provision were introduced 29a is on 23rd November 2017, but 
    
      238A or 240 A MSME there is an exemption. 66% rule was introduced on 6/6/2018. Thereafter 
      in 2019 330 day rule was introduced trial. Then in 2020 was washed out of Covid 19 has gone ever 
      since the IBC 23rd March was under suspension though 10 year was introduced in 2020. 
      Thereafter very recently in 4/4/2021 we saw a very big change with respect to MSME introducing 
      pre - packaged Insolvency resolution process. There are several decision and regulations 
      everybody has worked wonders in the short period of time to make this Law dynamic, it is 
      definitely disruptive but there is a IBC itself disruptive due to pandemic that is the actual fact of 
      it that itself has to be suspended is the truth. Thank you.</p>
      <p style='text-align:center;'><b>  Inaugural Address</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Chief Justice Shri MM Kumar, Founder President NCLT</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'>The Pandemic has made very difficult to spoke face to face however the VC has made it possible 
      even though distant, appreciating the team ASSOCHAM for organizing this Webinar, June 2016 
      when the NCLT established I took over as first President didn&apos;t have any idea that the Insolvency 
      & Bankruptcy will be un the domain of NCLT Applicate Tribunal. Thinking was that in 2016, the 
      deciding Company cases pending before the High Court got transferred to the NCLT. In the 
      beginning there was hardly seriousness wound by the corporate debtors to the enactment of the 
      court. It was not that the Insolvency Law introduced IBC first in the country, there was 2 
      important neatening Residency Town Insolvency Act 19 under 9 and the provincial Insolvency 
      cases were decided under these acts but no reappearing has been issued and it will be matter of 
      discussion and said to the Supreme Court there are reasons for not notifying the repeal of the old 
      statue and the proceedings under are still to continue even after they are appealed the pending 
      cases. On Raipur Power, we appointed an IPR and due to some of lack of knowledge to the people 
      and should appreciate Supreme Court reason for occasion and members of the Bar who have 
      brilliantly, efficiently have helped the benches and it has reached the Supreme Court with in no 
      time. These principals which has not been let down had stayed very long time. The study of IBC 
      Code cannot be complete without study of subjection, any leader or practitioner of IBC Code must 
      have knowledge of many other subjects because the right of audience has been given to CA, CS, 
      and Cost of Audits beside the Members of the Bar. By virtue of their long practice they are familiar 
      to the constitution, we cannot help law of Contract excessive delegation conditional legislation to 
      the judgement of Supreme Court. IBC Knowledge will be incomplete if we read in isolation we 
      should have knowledge rudimentary principals of constitutional law of article 14. So if you want 
      to practice IBC timely master the rudimentary principals of constitutional law contract law 
      company law Banking Law Negotiable Instrument Act and so on. The first issue with regard to 
      limitation act the journey is devious as for as law of limitation and IBC is concern. The judgement 
      of the IBC was overturned by the appellate tribunal on the grounds anything which has come from 
      2016, book will be the limitation. That was the thinking of the appellate tribunal. The Law of 
      interpretation is also essentials for those who are to practice IBC and it must be known to many 
      practitioners of IBC. Supreme Court also observed any RP issue a certificate under section 30 
      subscription 4 of the IBC that the resolution can&apos;t is a complaint with all the existing Law So kindly 
      consider in the panel discussion weather the reasoning adopted by 80 the appellate tribunal and 
      the reasoning from NCLT and Supreme Court are better than each other because the rational and 
      reasoning the constitutional back bone of the Judgement. The practitioner of IBC should also be 
      known about the Judiciary discipline or the appellate tribunal will bind the NCLT and how the 
      Supreme Court will bind everybody and all these things to be known to the practitioners. During 
      the last judgement in April, the appellate tribunal has laid doe the statement of account abide 
     
      before ROC or any other authorities would not give fresh lease of life because they are actualized 
      by completion of Law. Therefore we should not come to conclusion under section 18 and have an 
      acknowledgement within three years of the limitation period from the date of default has 
      occurred. The Supreme Court also discussed by filling the return, dose not intent the judgement 
      of section 18. So kindly discuss it can be overcome and the view taken by the Supreme Court and 
      the three so many sections says the company should file company returns. Kindly go through the 
      reasoning and the rational why it happened like this. The conditional judgement on April 21, 
      notifying a particular clause is permissible constitutional judgement article 14 as a notification to 
      one clause earlier or later are notifying at the instance at the deceptive govt. would result into any 
      unconstitutional valued or it is justified and the Supreme Court has taken the view and it is 
      perfectly permissible and the old judgement has been dismissed. The jurisdictional accept the 
      personnel guarantor would be DRP or would be NCL. What would the resolution plan? What is 
      they liability of guarantor under section 128 and all these area matter of discussions. Try to search 
      any rule of Law which says that the resolution plan must be or must be in less than liquidation 
      and Supreme Court says there is no provision and in another April 21 judgement has wide 
      consequences. MSME is very important sector and special provision under IBC has made from 
      section 59A a AAA has added in IBC. When the 10 member team travelled to London, the pre 
      packed resolution was there and Singapore recently 2 years has passed. Any protection given to 
      the Entrepreneurs who has suffered the corporate insolvency resolution process, the entrepreneur 
      who has gone under hammer in big 11 cases how to rehabilitees them to end the formula and any 
      period can be fixed from the initiation of CRP they will be not tighten so we need to look into these 
      thin to reduce the fallen of entrepreneurs Thank You.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> Eminent Panel</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> Shri. Ritesh Kavdia, Executive Director, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI)</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'> Good noon to everybody, we passed a mile stone, on May 2016 was enacted. Since than it has 
      rolled out unprecedented dispute within 180 days of the enactment of the act all the preparation 
      were done by the govt. establishment of NCLT after that the regulator registration of Insolvency 
      professional agency being out of regulations and all these done in 180 days and by 1st December 
      everything was ready. Since than all the stake holders of this eco system has contributed a truly a 
      reform by the stake holders we can all share out whatever the credit we can draw out from it. In 
      fact NCL Constituted in hearing the company act matters and IBC was an addition load, under 
      the chairmanship of Justice MM Kumar NCLT has settled many issues and they guided IBBI by 
      framing the legislative work right now NCLT has past more than 12 to 13 thousand orders that are 
      available on our website this eco system has moves to quite matured level we have 3500 IPs govt. 
      has been committed that this reform will need adaptation and growing need of the business the 
      merging challenges and now 6 amendments has been made to the Court and all these objectives 
      has made further to the court to some extent we can say the Law reforms has done in a satisfactory 
      manner this reform redefine that relationship between debtors and Creditors. Even IBBI 
      regulation has been has confirmed on multiple occasions. So latest of the amendment from the 
      court on pre-packed insolvency resolution process when these code was considered it was well 
      thought of once for the initial these we are starting normal CRP but soon we will have matured 
      products in pre packed resolution under the Insolvency frame work so every time this change of 
      Management is a cost on the efficiency of the corporate Debtors and that cost can be avoided if 
 
      the business are kept to the Minimum. At the initial time rights of Creditors were very week 
      Creditors in delaying the proceedings now this code has put in right place think this is an 
      appropriate time to pre pack amendment on everything so Insolvency Law Committee started 
      deliberation on a prepack system in India. Due to pandemic the IBBI has share of Misfortune and 
      this has most challenging for us. Due to severe impact on business the govt. has recognized that 
      all the economy under stress we won\&apos;t resolution applicants and the most Vulnerable sector is 
      MSMEs because they all run on informal systems and normally they don\&apos;t see resolution 
      applicants. Recognizing that the govt. has the limit of CRP crush hold from 1 lakh to 1 crore to 
      the MSMEs to provide some breathing time suspension of resolution Insolvency has done but 
      real lies on resolving the Balance sheet and having the suspension dose not to resolve the balance 
      sheet and we have to be alive to the fact that to relive the corporate debtors from its stress and a 
      scheme was very much required and in Atma Nirbhar Bharath scheme will rolled out special 
      schemes for MSMEs and even in the last budget and soon special schemes frame work will 
      launched for MSMEs. Govt. has a ready frame work for pre packed it was thought that better we 
      try this pre pack for MSMEs as a special Insolvency resolution frame work which is cost effective 
      and a quick mechanism for MSMEs and initial part has been made only for MSMEs. Even though 
      the code has kept intact its Creditors who has absolutely control and corporate debtors get benefit 
      of moratorium calm period has been provided and completive recovery proceeding put on hold 
      and reasonable chance are given for the corporate debtors, resolution plan is binding on all and 
      that is the most important aspect of this code so section 29 A is applicable The pre pack 
      mechanism frame work is efficient and we hope that it will be adopted by this industry in a big 
      way and Law is good as its implementation and frame work is an experiment and it has reached 
      extreme trust on management corporate debtors. If the management is clean and well-intended 
      and enjoys the trust of the creditors and pre pack will be very useful for them under the discipline
      of the court and the success of this frame work will be friendly and the resolution frame work from 
      the govt.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Eminent Panel</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Shri. Ramji Srinivasan, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'>Happy Birth day to IBBI. Highlighting the recent developments in IBC, and incredible five years 
      for IBBI. No economic legislation has meet with such a tremendous success which is measurer 
      quantifiable and visible in real terms as the IBC. Had a privilege to argue the very first appeal in
      almost every commercial Appellate Tribunal and Regulatory Tribunal in Electricity, 
      Telecommunication, Gas, and Pipeline with the privilege of first appeal before the NCLAT in the 
      inventive leading Judgement in the IBC was the first one. Purposive intervention has to be given 
      thereafter move to the new management with maximize of the assets so these experiments has 
      been succeeded. There after we had many other judgements. Supreme Court noticed that even in 
      180 days it doesn&apos;t happen it will be called corporate debt, so you need to avoid that issues. The 
      embassy which talk about the jurisdiction the NCLT do decide matters in right directions to take 
      the constitutional role of the High Court late se boundaries to NCLT also. NCLT all order are 
      subject to Law and consent of stakeholder&apos;s would have been required if there is no petitioner and 
      the entity become same. We there is a preexisting disputes can we pursue the IBC proceedings 
      and therefore Supreme Court clarified that it should be not be pursued and if any disputes that is 
      evidence that is IBC can be permitted to be pursued. The recent decisions was a tortures root to 
      up to the supreme court this was the case the CD has acknowledge the dept. in its balance sheet 
      and therefore hit by limitation beyond three years of default therefore you cannot go ahead with 
     
      the IBC proceedings so the NCLT rejected the claim and said you can proceed against which case 
      was filed in NCAT. Thank you.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Shri. CS Nagendra D Rao, President, Institute of Company Secretaries of India (ICSI)</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'> It is greater insights to the audience with this timely organized IBC Webinar, and the outset will 
      appreciate the IBC on the stride gain in 5 years and its enactment in 2016, this progress is 
      culmination as a part of the govt. entities and stakeholders. IBC change the Insolvency resolution 
      in India being a debtor in position regime to creditor in control affairs of the company. IBC 
      Introduced in India to fair initiation between parties and encouraging the revival of the companies 
      by formulation of resolution process. The judicial pronouncements have played a crucial role in 
      development of Law. Various legal pronouncements acts and judgements have unpresidental 
      impact on the frame work. IBC in a short span has raised India in a World Bank and doing 
      business ranking 142 in 2014 to 63 in 2020. According to IBBI the resolution plan yielded about 
      191%of the realizable value for the financial creditor at a average of 380 days tremendous 
      improvement from the previous regime which took about 1200 days average to resolve. The ICSI 
      has also contributed in the endives and form its insolvency professional&apos;s agency ICSI IIP enroll 
      to educate train and also monitored the performance the registered members as Insolvency 
      professionals. Today we all stand un precedent in this difficult time in this century the whip of 
      wave of pandemic has stuck each and every person and business of this country. As the Indian 
      economy was building to show the sign of recovery from the pandemic disasters the second wave 
      has shattered the business. Govt. Since last year has taken measures to the ease the economy to 
      address these adverse the govt. has been preparing the strategies and actions not only for business 
      continuity but also for reviving the economy regulators have been working all through the difficult 
      times to facilitate the stakeholders. It is appreciate the court Tribunal have adopted this facility to 
      cater the demand of the stakeholders. Since beginning the IBC has involving and revolving 
      legislation and there has been amendments to the IBC to out the practical difficulties the 
      interpretation Issues faced by the practitioners and other stakeholders. Hon&apos;ble Supreme Court 
      and NCLT and NCLAT have pronounced various landmark judgements and sure many 
      deliverables will take place. Thank you.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Panel Discussion:</b></p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'> Mod : Ref to the 243 section IBC the reason why age old Insolvency resolution for Individuals and 
      non-corporate the presidency insolvency and the provincial Insolvency act. Why it is notified even 
      the repeal of them.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> Srinivasan Ramji </b>: This is legislative in Nature. Mau not have fall exactly with in jurisdiction of 
      IBC they may have been certain proceedings which may have commenced or continue. Supreme 
      Court should have examined also innovative. We need see IBBI has made any recommendation. </p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Ritesh Kavdia :</b> it\&apos;s a pre mature for whole of Insolvency and as a calibrated manner it was only 
      ruled to the personnel Corporate debtors. Because they are covered both the legislations as in CRP 
      has multiple remedies they can refer IBC same way for personnel guarantors have multiple 
      options. The Process has initiated if 243 has to be repealed it has to be repealed for all of them. 
      We have not attended yet. Rolling out a individual Insolvency country like India once dealing with 
      such cases we need to be aligned to their sentiments culture emotional issues and the social Issues. 
      
      So Individual Insolvency might be distance away from IBBI. Anticipating the partnership firm\&apos;s
      proprietorship firms to come into and remaining individuals will come last. </p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'> Mod : 60 (2) and (3) will be completely taken care of the requirements related to the personnel 
      guarantors to the corporate debtors. Because if there is a proceedings in front of Supreme Court
      or an insolvency Court may not be over as an Insolvent sort of a Grey area we see?</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> N K Dilip</b> : The Intent of this legislation is commercial in nature and intent to be given current 
      meaning and intent of the commercial legislative has bought forward. Commenting on the 
      personnel Guarantor it is these are very welcome move the estate is resolved as quickly as possible 
      if the personnel guarantor of the CRP has the both go along with CRP happening to be certainty 
      and closure of matter as early as possible. One of the area is still lacking is group Insolvency in 
      days to come most of the Indian Business are in Culamarated structure. So we are seeing the 
      experiment has happening between PG and CRP hopefully MSME and PRPF also will have an 
      experiment and also based on the success will move forward. </p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'> Mod : MSME sector plays a very important role and the contribution to the GDP by MSME is one 
      reason why the entire country is focused giving opportunity for a large number of Employment a 
      generation in this country and considering the 28% of unemployment in recent days report. So is 
      IBC is Boon or Bane for MSME?</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Anil Goel</b> : As the country is dependent on MSME, in the last four and a half years actually done 
      well with MSMEs, outlet it has gained little in their capacity they have taken the advantage of IBC 
      to great extent. Merely the fear of IBC lot of large Corporates has struck in making the payment 
      to their suppliers in capacity of Operational Creditors. The CIRP has taking away their control and 
      custody of assets and Business which is disruptive of the running Business. In 1st June the limit 
      was increased to MSMEs and it is now pre comfortable with 50 thousand crore and 250 crore of 
      Domestic Turnover in Exports and process of registration is very simple. The PIRP has introduces 
      in a lightening manner rules and regulation was notified and it is live and any one can approach 
      the financial Creditor to opt for PIRP. The Courts will take not much time and will not be contested 
      and cons usual by the corporate debtor. Benefit is MSME business model is viable and feasible
      but somehow landed into non compliances or not able to service the debt so all these things are 
      debtor to come and invest in MSME or anyone to become Partner or to acquire a running Business 
      just because of the fear pf uncertainties. So PIRM is a definitely a Boon for MSME. Interns of 
      Investment, adding Partners, Shareholders.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> Mad :</b> Why we are not thought about prepackaged Insolvency process for all the Corporates 
      particularly large corporates and was the logic introduced only for MSMEs and leave out the large 
      once and probably more important in the Economic Systems.</p>              
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b>Ritesh Kavdia :</b> When the prepacked was recommended by the committee, it was recommended 
      to all the corporate debtors in a phased manner and before it could be implemented the resolution 
      frame work for MSMEs were very much required. This MSMEs are somewhat in between 
      corporate individuals sort of structures. Many of them rely on informal structure and there is no 
      fine line between the corporates and individuals so correct resolutions are required for MSMEs 
      because only the corporates debtors are more interested in taking their assets. So considering all 
      this the MSMEs are under great distress and on urgent basis this s the first phase implementation 
      we have prepacked for MSMEs. If this experiment success we hope that various Schemes to other 
      corporates as well.</p>
     
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> NK Dilip:</b> Anything is possible we hopefully we will get Judicial discipline. We are seeing the 
      situation CRIP fails Liquidation started and then we see back door 230 section. In that 
      compromise coming under the Companies Act. So we see everything happen as a possibility recent 
      withdrawal and one time settlement been offered so we need to look at the 80 20 rule the main 
      provision for success and not get distracted.</p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> Mod :</b> Commercial wisdom and COC role of adjudicating authority is very Minimum in CARP and 
      there petition stage and even after the creditors the objection tight by a way of Creditor or a 
      shareholder by directly approaching NCLT and doing objection sake and File 
      Srinivas Ramji : Transparency is very important and the sailing future has to published otherwise 
      people don\&apos;t have an option to know what is examined in the matter. The salient feature of the 
      resolution plan proved can be published it should not lead to open the doors to large number of 
      litigation. 
      NK Dilip : The minority shareholders in this transaction but never in management he is left high 
      in this resolution to exercise unless as a bidder investing more. It is good order get published prior 
      to public announcement made. 
      Mod : Concluding remark, in order to work efficiently we have to have other regulators also 
      supporting with the same manner with same efficiency. Weather it is Central or State govt. 
      departments weather it is regulators there is lot of difference everything will fall in line in IBC but 
      the same reach is not there for ancillary units. So in order to build an Eco System which function 
      and delivers its objective and faster than ever before. </p>
      <p style='text-align:justify;'><b> END....... </b></p>