ASCI implements guidelines for “Dark Pattern” Advertisement

ASCI implements guidelines for “Dark Pattern” Advertisement

Author: Jayshree Chandra, Senior Partner & Ansuman Mishra, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunityne

The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) recently introduced the Guidelines for Online Deceptive Design Patterns in Advertising (“ODDP Guidelines”) to regulate the deceptive practices in the advertisement realm in terms of the prescriptions under chapter 1 of the Code for Self-Regulation of Advertising Content in India. The Code requires advertisement to not mislead by omission, exaggeration, implication or ambiguity. These guidelines, which came into effect from 1st September, 2023, aim to uphold the principles of honesty in advertisements and prevent the abuse of consumer’s trust laid down in the Code.

The ODDP Guidelines are built upon the discussions initiated by ASCI through their paper titled “Dark Patterns – the New Threat to Consumer Protection”, published in 2022. Dark patterns are practices and tactics adopted by businesses within the digital realm, primarily in online user interfaces, that undermine consumer independence and autonomy and deceptively influence their decision-making. These practices frequently involve trickery, coercion, or manipulation and likely to harm or disadvantage the consumers in varied ways even though it is often difficult to ascertain or measure the same. While it may be challenging to quantify the extent of the harm in some cases, these strategies are aimed at steering individuals toward choices that are not in their best interest. The ultimate end goal is to trick the consumers into doing things that they would otherwise not do or do in lesser frequency for business advantage, viz. getting user to buy, buy more of or continue to buy, a good or service; or spend more money on a good or more time on a service; or give up more data than desired.

Dark patterns have become increasingly prevalent and involve manipulating user interface and user experience designs and online decision-making structures to influence consumer choices in the digital space, including within online marketplaces. False or paid-for reviews misguide choices, leading to personal and financial losses, while privacy breaches and psychological stress add to the toll. With the rapid growth of Indian-e-commerce sector, dark patterns has become an increasing area of consumer vulnerability where the consumers are left to grapple with the consequences of choices influenced by forces beyond their awareness or control. ASCI and the Department of Consumer Affairs have expressed concerns regarding these practices, leading to the issuance of the ODDP guidelines. Their primary objective is to ensure that consumers are not coerced or led into unintended actions without their clear and genuine consent, or through deceitful means.

 The ODDP Guidelines apply to all forms of advertising content in the digital sphere spanning across various mediums including e-commerce, digital media, airline services, food delivery, and more, on apps and websites and communication facilitated by or through wide spectrum of platforms such as the internet, on-demand platforms, mobile broadcasts, digital home entertainment, terrestrial television, and other similar channels.

To ensure the advertisers do not breach the Code the ODDP Guidelines regulate the digital advertisements that adopt drip pricing, bait and switch, false urgency and disguised advertisement practices for e-marketing.

Drip Pricing - Drip Pricing is a deceptive practice where certain price components are concealed until the very end of the purchasing process or after purchase confirmation. To prevent drip pricing the prices quoted in advertisements and e-commerce platforms must encompass all non-optional taxes, duties, fees, and charges that are applicable to all or most buyers. Such transparency is crucial to avoid confusion about the final price and enable easy price comparisons.

Bait and Switch - Advertisement can be misleading if ads or their elements suggest one outcome based on consumer actions but deliver a different result, viz. customers selecting a product at a specified price but being charged a higher amount later, offering an enticing product and then claiming it to be out of stock while proposing an alternative, or altering the function of familiar symbols, like changing the meaning of an ‘X’ in an ad’s top right corner. Such misrepresentations can confuse consumers.

False Urgency – Often advertisements mislead the consumers stating or implying that the availability of a particular product or service are more limited than they actually are. For instance, advertising airline seats at a certain price implying limited availability when there are more seats left. In such cases, advertisers must demonstrate that, at the time of conveying limited availability and resulting urgency, the product or service was genuinely scarce to avoid misleading consumers.

Disguised Ads - Advertisements presented in a format resembling editorial or organic content must unmistakably disclose their status as ads. This applies to various scenarios, including influencer posts, paid reviews, and ads designed to mimic editorial content. The aim is to ensure that consumers can distinguish between genuine content and promotional material.

These guidelines, jointly released by the Department of Consumer Affairs and the ASCI, reflect the collaborative effort to prioritize consumer protection by addressing deceptive advertisement practices that manipulate consumer choices and hinder their right to access accurate information.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Mr. Ansuman Mishra is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


Five things same-sex couples should know before buying property in India. 

Author: Sunil Tyagi, Managing Partner ZEUS Law Associates

Published in https://www.moneycontrol.com/ on 17th October 2023

In 2018, the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench repealed Section 377, decriminalizing homosexuality and marking a crucial victory for the LGBTQIA+ community, however, the Supreme Court has today refused to give legal recognition to same-sex marriages. The absence of formal marriage rights for same-sex couples has repercussions on succession and inheritance laws. The legal framework governing succession and inheritance is primarily dictated by personal laws corresponding to an individual's religious affiliation. Consequently, even when there is social acceptance, these couples continue to face discrimination in various aspects which, inter alia, include purchase of property, inheritance, access to joint home loans, etc.

This article discusses 5 (five) questions that same-sex couples usually ponder about before purchasing property.

  1. Can same-sex couples jointly buy property? 

While any heterosexual couple in India can jointly buy a residential property, same-sex couples would not be able to jointly own property as same-sex marriages are not recognised in India. Various government bodies only permit family members to jointly own residential property, therefore, same-sex couples might be able to own the property as individual co-owners, but they would still lack the satisfaction of jointly owning the property as a couple. 

  1. Would this have changed same-sex marriage had been allowed?

Legally recognising same-sex marriage would have yielded numerous positive outcomes in the real estate sector. It would have enabled them to jointly apply for residential plots under various government schemes, as then they would have been family members and would have enjoyed the privilege of jointly owned property. 

  1. Can same-sex couples inherit property? How will this change if same-sex marriages are permitted?

Indian succession laws are determined by the personal laws of distinct religious communities, and these laws categorize heirs into two gender-based groups: Male and Female. The Hindu Succession Act, applicable to Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Jains, does not recognize same-sex marriages, depriving same-sex spouses of automatic inheritance rights. Likewise, personal laws in other religious communities like Muslims, Christians, and Parsis also do not acknowledge same-sex marriages, posing challenges for same-sex couples seeking inheritance rights. Same-sex marriages can be permitted by amendments to personal laws governing succession to grant same-sex spouses legal rights over a partner's property in the event of their untimely death or otherwise. In the absence of such laws, same-sex couples have no legally recognised rights of inheritance to the partner’s property.

  1. Can same-sex couples avail of joint home loans? How will this change if same-sex marriage is legally recognised?

While any two people can buy a property together, only blood relatives or legally married couples can jointly apply for home loans. If one wants to apply for a home loan jointly, one of the mandatory requirements is proof of relationship. This limitation prevents LGBTQ+ partners from applying for loans together in the absence of legalized same-sex marriage. Upon the recognition of same-sex marriages, such prevailing limitations would no longer be applicable as they would be able to provide proof of relationship to avail of joint home loans.

  1. What is the situation of same-sex couples around the world?

The situation surrounding LGBTQ+ rights and recognition varies widely around the world. While several jurisdictions have made strides in legalizing same-sex marriage and protecting LGBTQ+ individuals from discrimination, others continue to uphold restrictive policies and discriminatory practices. In some countries, like France and the USA, LGBTQ+ couples can jointly own property and access the same financial rights and privileges as those accorded to heterosexual couples, while in some others, legal recognition and inheritance rights remain elusive. The global landscape is marked by an ongoing struggle for equal rights and recognition, reflecting the diversity of cultural, social, and legal perspectives on LGBTQ+ issues.

*****


ZEUS Newsletter October 2023

Highlights:

Corporate Brief

  • The Notification no. RBI/2023-24/60 dated 13.09.2023 issued by RBI pertaining to Responsible Lending Conduct – Release of Movable / Immovable Property Documents on Repayment/ Settlement of Personal Loans.
  • Notification no. RBI/2023-24/64 dated 30.09.2023 issued by RBI regarding a review on withdrawal on circular of Rs. 2000/- bank notes.
  • Notification no. 644(E) dated 01.09.2023 issued by the MCA pertaining to the amendment w.r.t. the Limited Liability Partnership (Second Amendment) Rules, 2023.
  • Circular no. SEBI/HO/DDHS/DDHS-POD2/P/CIR/2023/ 151 dated 04.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Mechanism for Sharing of Information by Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) to Debenture Trustees (DTs).
  • Circular no. SEBI/HO/GSD/TAD/P/CIR/2023/149 dated 04.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Change in mode of payment w.r.t. SEBI Investor Protection and Education Fund Bank a/c.
  • Circular no. SEBI/HO/DDHS-PoD-2/P/CIR/2023/153 dated 11.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Board nomination rights to unitholders of Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs).
  • Circular no. SEBI/HO/DDHS-PoD-2/P/CIR/2023/154 dated 11.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Board nomination rights to unitholders of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).
  • Notification no. RBI/2023-24/58 dated 04.09.2023 issued by RBI pertaining to the Operation of Pre-Sanctioned Credit Lines at Banks through Unified Payments Interface (UPI).
  • Notification no. RBI/2023-24/61 dated 13.09.2023 issued by RBI pertaining to PM Vishwakarma Scheme.

Real Estate Brief

  • Press Release dated 04.09.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority – National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi (Delhi RERA Authority) regarding registering of the real estate project to avoid penalty.
  • Order dated 05.09.2023 issued by Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Rajasthan RERA Authority) for submission of service drawings.
  • Order dated 11.09.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority – National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi (Delhi RERA Authority) for issuing of directions in respect of maximum number of dwelling units that can be constructed on various sizes of plots.
  • Order dated 11.09.2023 issued by Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Gujarat RERA Authority) for modification in the delegation of powers for the quasi-judicial proceedings regarding execution applications to the Adjudicating Officer.
  • Order dated 11.09.2023 issued by Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Gujarat RERA Authority) for distribution of complaints/cases to be adjudicated by different benches in Gujarat RERA.
  • Order dated 14.09.2023 issued by Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Rajasthan RERA Authority) under Section 37 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and Regulation 23 of the Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority Regulations, 2017.
  • Order dated 20.09.2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA Authority) for extension of timelines for obtaining MahaRERA Real Estate Agent Certificate of Competency.
  • Order dated 27.09.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority – National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi (Delhi RERA Authority) for issuing of directions in respect of providing certain details by the real estate agents.
  • Letter dated 15.09.2023 by Uttar Pradesh Real estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA Authority) regarding instructions to banks for adherence to provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and UP RERA Project Account Directions, 2020 and circulars of RBI regarding bank accounts of projects in UP RERA.

    NCLT Estate Brief

  • Companies Leasing Aircrafts to Indian Carriers Can Now Repossess Their Aircraft Without The Imposition of a Moratorium Under IBC Rules.

   Litigation Brief

  • Supreme Court Unveils Blueprint for Validating and Enforcing Wills.
  • Condonable period under limitation act shall stand extended w.e.f. 15th march 2020.
  • Provisions of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of CPC are not a mandate for the Court’s exercising powers under Section 9 of the A&C Act.

Corporate Brief

Notification no. RBI/2023-24/60 dated 13.09.2023 issued by RBI pertaining to Responsible Lending Conduct – Release of Movable / Immovable Property Documents on Repayment/ Settlement of Personal Loans.

  • The notification emphasises to promote responsible lending conduct and address customer grievances, RBI has issued guidelines for the release of property documents upon repayment of personal loans.
  • In terms of the guidelines on Fair Practices Code issued to various Regulated Entities (REs) since 2003, REs are required to release all movable / immovable property documents upon receiving full repayment and closure of loan account. However, it has been observed that the REs follows divergent practices in release of such movable / immovable property documents leading to customer grievances and disputes. To address the issues faced by the borrowers and towards promoting responsible lending conduct among the REs, several directions have been issued including inter alia:
  1. The REs shall release all the original movable / immovable property documents and remove charges registered with any registry within a period of 30 days after full repayment/ settlement of the loan account.
  2. The borrower shall be given the option of collecting the original movable / immovable property documents either from the banking outlet / branch where the loan account was serviced or any other office of the RE where the documents are available, as per her / his preference. In case of delay in releasing of original movable / immovable property documents or failing to file charge satisfaction form with relevant registry beyond 30 days after full repayment/ settlement of loan, the RE shall communicate to the borrower reasons for such delay. In case where the delay is attributable to the RE, it shall compensate the borrower at the rate of ₹5,000/- for each day of delay.
  3. In case of loss/damage to original movable / immovable property documents, either in part or in full, the REs shall assist the borrower in obtaining duplicate/certified copies of the movable / immovable property documents and shall bear the associated costs, in addition to paying compensation as indicated at paragraph 6 above. However, in such cases, an additional time of 30 days will be available to the REs to complete this procedure and the delayed period penalty will be calculated thereafter (i.e., after a total period of 60 days).
  4. The compensation provided under these directions shall be without prejudice to the rights of a borrower to get any other compensation as per any applicable law.

Notification RBI/2023-24/64 dated 30.09.2023 issued by RBI regarding a review on withdrawal on circular of Rs. 2000/- bank notes.

  • The circular refers to previous notifications regarding the withdrawal of ₹2000 banknotes. As of September 29, 2023, 96% of the ₹2000 banknotes in circulation as of May 19, 2023, have been returned, leaving only ₹0.14 lakh crore still in circulation.
  • With effect from October 8, 2023, banks shall stop accepting ₹2000 banknotes for credit to accounts or exchange to other denomination banknotes.

Notification no. 644(E) dated 01.09.2023 issued by the MCA pertaining to the amendment w.r.t. the Limited Liability Partnership (Second Amendment) Rules, 2023.

  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs has issued Notification No. 644(E) on September 1, 2023, to introduce key amendments to the Limited Liability Partnership (Second Amendment) Rules, 2023. These amendments bring significant changes to the regulatory framework governing Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) in India. The Form 3, Information with regard to limited liability partnership agreement and changes, if any, made therein, and Form 4, (Notice of appointment, cessation, change in name/ address/ designation of a designated partner or partner and consent to become a partner/ designated partner, have been replaced and new Form 3 and 4 have been introduced.

Circular no. SEBI/HO/DDHS/DDHS-POD2/P/CIR/2023/ 151 dated 04.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Mechanism for Sharing of Information by Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) to Debenture Trustees (DTs).

  • SEBI (Credit Rating Agencies) Regulations, 1999 (“CRA Regulations”) and circulars used thereunder require sharing of certain information for CRAs to Debenture Trustees (DTs).
  • Due to large quantum of information submitted daily by CRAs to DTs, as well as short timelines mandated for disclosure of this information by DTs, it is essential that the data shared by CRAs be structured and submitted in a specified format for easier accessibility and analysis of the data.
  • Accordingly, based on discussion with CRAs and DTs, an excel template is mentioned which the CRAs shall use for their daily submissions of rating revisions to DTs.
  • Circular shall be applicable with effect from October 1, 2023 and CRAs shall report on their compliance with this circular.
  • Monitoring shall be done in terms of the half-yearly internal audit for CRAs, mandated under Regulation 22 of the CRA Regulations.

Circular no. SEBI/HO/GSD/TAD/P/CIR/2023/149 dated 04.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Change in mode of payment w.r.t. SEBI Investor Protection and Education Fund Bank a/c.

  • As per circular no. SEBI/HO/ISD/CIR/P/2020/135 dated July 23, 2020 wherein SEBI had prescribed that the amounts shall be credited to the SEBI Investor Protection and Education Fund through online mode or by way of a demand draft (DD) in favour of the Board (i.e. SEBI IPEF). Henceforth, remittances to SEBI IPEF shall be made only through a link provided by SEBI.
  • Vide this Circular SEBI has informed that a new bank account to facilitate market participants to make payment to SEBI Investor Protection and Education Fund (SEBI IPEF) has been opened by SEBI.
  • While making the remittances online, through the link, remitters shall furnish the requisite information like name of the payer, PAN, mobile number, email ID, the purpose for which payment is made, the amount to be paid.

Circular no. SEBI/HO/DDHS-PoD-2/P/CIR/2023/153 dated 11.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Board nomination rights to unitholders of Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs).

  • SEBI circular dated September 11, 2023, Regulation 4(2)(h) of SEBI (Infrastructure Investment Trusts) Regulations, 2014 (“InvIT Regulations”) inter-alia provides that unitholder(s) holding not less than ten percent of the total outstanding units of the InvIT, either individually or collectively, shall be entitled to nominate one director on the board of directors of the Investment Manager, in the manner as may be specified by the Board.
  • Vide this Circular SEBI has prescribed, the framework to exercise board nomination rights by the Eligible Unitholder(s). The said framework has been attached as Annexure A to this circular.
  • This circular also provides that the Investment Manager of the InvIT shall, within ten days from the end of each calendar month, review whether the Eligible Unitholder(s) who have exercised the board nomination right, continue to have/hold the required number of units of InvIT and make a report of the same. The Investment Manager of the InvIT shall submit such report to the Trustee of the InvIT.

Circular no. SEBI/HO/DDHS-PoD-2/P/CIR/2023/154 dated 11.09.2023 issued by SEBI pertaining to Board nomination rights to unitholders of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).

  • SEBI circular dated September 11, 2023, Regulation 4(2)(g) of SEBI (Real Estate Investment Trusts) Regulations, 2014 (“REIT Regulations”) inter-alia provides that unitholder(s) holding not less than ten percent of the total outstanding units of the REIT, either individually or collectively, shall be entitled to nominate one director on the board of directors of the Manager, in the manner as may be specified by the Board.
  • Vide this Circular SEBI has prescribed, the framework to exercise board nomination rights by the Eligible Unitholder(s). The said framework has been attached as Annexure A to this circular.
  • This circular also provides that the Manager of the REIT shall, within ten days from the end of each calendar month, review whether the Eligible Unitholder(s) who have exercised the board nomination right, continue to have/hold the required number of units of REIT and make a report of the same. The Manager of the REIT shall submit such report to the Trustee of the REIT.

Notification no. RBI/2023-24/58 dated 04.09.2023 issued by RBI pertaining to the Operation of Pre-Sanctioned Credit Lines at Banks through Unified Payments Interface (UPI).

  • RBI has expanded the scope of the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) to include pre-sanctioned credit lines from Scheduled Commercial Banks. Currently, savings account, overdraft account, prepaid wallets and credit cards can be linked to UPI.
  • The scope of UPI is now being expanded by inclusion of credit lines as a funding account.
  • Under this facility, payments through a pre-sanctioned credit line issued by a Scheduled Commercial Bank to individuals, with prior consent of the individual customer, are enabled for transactions using the UPI System.
  • Banks may, as per their Board approved policy, stipulate terms and conditions of use of such credit lines. The terms may include, among other items, credit limit, period of credit, rate of interest, etc.

Notification RBI/2023-24/61 dated 13.09.2023 issued by RBI pertaining to PM Vishwakarma Scheme.

  • The Indian government has launched the 'PM Vishwakarma Scheme' to assist artisans and craftspeople in advancing their skills and businesses. This program includes offering credit support at reduced interest rates, with the government providing interest subvention.
  • Eligible lending institutions should follow the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises for implementation.

Real Estate Brief

Press Release dated 04.09.2023 of Delhi RERA regarding registering of the real estate project to avoid penalty.

A press release was issued by Delhi RERA Authority to once again clarify that as per Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the real estate projects that are being developed in NCT of Delhi which fall under the following categories are required to be compulsorily registered with the Authority:

  1. The projects that are being developed in part or full, on plot size of more than 500 sq. meters for purpose of sale or lease.
  2. The projects which envisage construction of more than 8 flats, apartments, floors, shops, commercial or office units, in all phases, on any size of plot for purpose of sale or lease.
  3. The projects which envisage plotting on an area of more than 500 sq. meters for purpose of sale or lease.
  4. All those projects falling under the abovementioned 1 to 3, for which completion certificate could not be obtained before 01.05.2017.

As per the said Press Release dated 04.09.2023, non-registration of the projects can invite penalty up to 10% of the estimated cost of project or imprisonment up to 3 years, or both.

Order Number F.1 (31)/RJ/RERA/2019/ D-2317 dated 05.09.2023 of Rajasthan RERA regarding submission of service drawings:

In suppression of the earlier order No. F1(31)RE/RERA/2019/2181 dated 14.07.2023 for registration of real estate projects, the Rajasthan RERA Authority has issued the following directions with regards to the mandate for submission of service drawings for registration of the project:

  1. At the time of registration, the promoter is required to upload declaration stating that the service drawings through the project profile modification module before the submission of OC/CC/partial CC.
  2. The promoter is also required to declare on affidavit that he shall submit all service drawings through project profile modification module before submitting the OC/CC/partial CC in accordance with order dated 10.08.2023 and numbered P.11(9) NVV/2020/Part-III issued by Urban Development and Housing Department or UDH.
  3. Where OC/CC/partial CC has been submitted before 10.08.2023, the same to be accepted after submission of service drawings according to the checklist issued by UDH.

Order Number 1 (128)/Directions/RERA/2023/ 2560-65 dated 11.09.2023 of Delhi RERA regarding the maximum number of dwelling units (DUs) that can be constructed on various sizes of plots:

As per the Unified Building Bye Laws, 2016 and as per the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dated 14.03.2008 in W.P(C) No. 4677 of 1985, M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India and ors., certain specific number of dwelling units have been allowed depending on the area of plot.

As per the Unified Building Bye Laws, 2016, all DUs should have a kitchen.

In order to ensure the compliance with the said order dated 14.03.2008 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the Delhi RERA Authority, vide Order No. F.1 (128)/Directions /RERA/2023/2560-65 dated 11.09.2023, issued the directions to the concerned civic bodies in respect of the building plans sanctioned after 15.09.2023 to have the following mandates:

  1. Clearly indicating the total number of dwelling units that can be constructed on the plot and marking each dwelling unit separately on the plan.
  2. Clearly indicating the total number of dwelling units that can be constructed on each floor.
  3. Identifying and marking each dwelling unit as – numerator to be the dwelling unit number and denominator be the total number of units allowed.
  4. Mentioning by the promoter/ builder/ collaborator the dwelling unit number given by the concerned civic body in the agreement(s) to sale and sale deed(s).

The Delhi RERA Authority also directed the sub-registrars not to register in case where:

  1. More units than the number of dwelling units permitted on a given plot under the said order dated 14.03.2008 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
  2. The sale deed of a dwelling unit does not mention the dwelling unit number given by the civic body in the sanctioned building plan.

Order Number GujRERA/Order-79 dated 11.09.2023 of Gujarat RERA regarding modification in delegation of powers for the quasi-judicial proceedings regarding execution applications to the Adjudicating Officer:

To address the need for deciding the quasi-judicial proceedings of execution applications under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 in a time bound manner, the Gujarat RERA Authority vide its order number GujRERA/Order-79 dated 11.09.2023, has decided to take the services of the Adjudicating officer, who has requisite qualification and experience of conducting of quasi-judicial matters in the process of execution proceedings. Further, vide its said order dated 11.09.2023, Gujarat RERA Authority delegated the power to the Adjudicating Officer to be part of the respective bench(es) to proceed with matters related to execution applications under Section 40. Further, to give effect to the said order dated 11.09.2023, the Authority directed that Order No. 55 dated 18.10.2021 will not be in force henceforth.

Order Number GujRERA/Order-80 dated 11.09.2023 of Gujarat RERA regarding distribution of complaints/cases to be adjudicated by different benches in Gujarat RERA:

Vide its Order number GujRERA/Order-80 dated 11.09.2023, Gujarat RERA Authority has constituted different benches comprising of Hon’ble Chairperson and/or Members to adjudicate complaints.

Order Number F4(1)/RJ/RERA/2017/Part/D-2324 dated 14.09.2023 of Rajasthan RERA regarding the amounts to be deposited for extension of registration of the projects:

Vide its order dated 14.09.2023, Rajasthan RERA Authority consolidated previous orders dated 16.08.2019, 13.05.2020, 22.05.2020, 10.08.2020, 25.08.2020, 17.03.3031, 30.03.2021, 28.06.2021, 27.09.2021 and 13.04.2023, in respect of the amounts to be deposited on annual basis for extension of the registration of the projects, and directed as follows:

Type of Extension

Extension Fee Standard Fee Penalty
In cases where first extension of the registration is applier for 6 months or less 50% of the registration fee NIL Only in case of delay, 50% of the registration fee
In cases where the extension of more than 6 months is required before the expiry of the validity period of registration of the project 50% of the registration fee 100% of the Registration Fee NIL
In cases where validity period of project registration has expired 50% of the registration fee An amount equal to the registration fee, if the delay does not exceed 90 days 50% of the registration fee
Twice the amount of registration fee, if the delay exceeds 90 days

Under Rajasthan RERA Authority’s order no. 873 dated 22.05.2020, if the extension of the registration has been applied for more than one year, then the abovementioned fee will increase proportionately on per year basis.

Order Number 41A/2023 dated 20.09.2023 of Maharashtra RERA regarding extension of timelines for obtaining MahaRERA Real Estate Agent Certificate of Competency:

To bring consistency in the practices of real estate agents, enhance knowledge and awareness and with a view to ensure that the real estate agents are professionally qualified to help/ assist home buyers/ allottees, MahaRERA Authority had previously introduced basic real estate agent training and certification course. The Authority vide its order dated 20.09.2023, has issued further directions in respect of the MahaRERA Real Estate Agent Certificate of Competency:

  1. With effect from 01.11.2023, the real estate agents with valid certificates of competency can apply for registration/ renewal of registration.
  2. Existing registered real estate agents are required to obtain the said Certificate of Competency before 01.01.2024, failing which action would be initiated against them.
  3. The mandate applies to the individual real estate agents, and in case of firms/ companies/ organizations – their authorized signatory as well as the employees/ staff/ officers etc. by whatever designation called working in firms/ LLP/ companies/ organizations of real estate agents, who deal and interact with homebuyers/ allottees for effecting the transactions in real estate projects.
  4. With effect from 01.01.2024, promoters of real estate project shall ensure that the names and addresses of the real estate agents, if any, to be given in compliance of Section 4(2)(j) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 shall be of only such real estate agents who have MahaRERA Real Estate Agent Certificate of Competency.

Order Number F.2(Guidelines on AML & CFT) AG/ RERA/ 2023/2925 dated 27.09.2023 of Delhi RERA regarding providing certain details by the registered real estate agents:

Vide its order dated 27.09.2023, the Delhi RERA Authority directed the registered real estate agents to provide PAN no., contact no., turnover during the last three assessment years being 2023-24 in the format provided in the said order, latest by 15.10.2023.

Letter dated 15.09.2023 by Uttar Pradesh Real estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA Authority) regarding instructions to banks for adherence to provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (‘Act’) and UP RERA Project Account Directions, 2020 and circulars of RBI regarding bank accounts of projects in UP RERA.

A letter was written by UP RERA Authority to the General Manager and Coordinator, State Level Bankers Committee, Bank of Baroda Building regarding the practices adopted by banks regarding issue of banks not following the norms and provisions as per the UP RERA Account Directions, 2020 dated 24.12.2020. Further, some banks have issued cheque books, debit cards and allowed net banking payment facilities to Promoters from the separate account of the project, whereas as per Section 4(2)(l)(D) of the Act, withdrawal from separate account is allowed only when the promoter submits the certificates of Chartered Accountant, Architect and Engineers to the concerned bank branch and the banker is satisfied that the amount requested can be withdrawn in view of the certificates so provided.

Therefore, the UP RERA Authority has, vide its letter dated 15.09.2023, requested the General Manager and Coordinator, State Level Bankers Committee to issue instructions to all the scheduled banks operational in the State of UP with regards to opening and operation of the accounts opened/being opened for a real estate project registered/ applied for being registered with the UP RERA Authority.

NCLT Brief

Companies Leasing Aircrafts to Indian Carriers Can Now Repossess Their Aircraft Without The Imposition of a Moratorium Under IBC Rules

On October 3, 2023, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (“MCA”), in accordance with Section 14(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (“the Code”) issued a notification granting aircraft lessors the authority to maintain possession of and reclaim their aircraft, aircraft engines, airframes, and helicopters, even in cases where the lessee company is undergoing insolvency proceedings before the appropriate adjudicating authority. This new development in the notification explicitly exempts transactions and agreements pertaining to the specified machinery under the Cape Town Convention and Protocol, 2001 from the application of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Code. This amendment is expected to significantly alleviate the challenges faced by the aviation sector by instilling trust and confidence in companies engaged in aircraft leasing.

Cape Town Convention and Protocol, 2001 and Indian Compliance

The Cape Town Convention and Protocol of 2001 primary objective is to enhance the efficiency and security of creditors through a system for registering security interests in tangible assets and offering remedies in case of defaults. While India is a signatory to the treaty, it has not yet ratified it. However, the recent notification appears to align with the Convention and Protocol, superseding the IBC's moratorium provision for aviation lessors. This move signifies a shift towards honouring international agreements and ensuring the rights of aircraft lessors in the insolvency process.

Status of Go First Airlines insolvency proceedings post MCA notification

The earlier moratorium was imposed by National Company Law Tribunal, Delhi in the voluntary insolvency proceedings filed by Go First [Originally Go Air (Inida) Limited], owned by Wadia Group putting a shield from the lessors and creditors and also restraining the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (“DGCA”) from accepting any applications for de-registration of aircraft from any lessors. The moratorium prompted the lessors to move to the Appellate Tribunal to seek relief. Getting their plea rejected by the Appellate Tribunal, the lessors approached the High Court of Delhi for the deregistration of their aircraft and raised the stance of the moratorium, being in contravention of the Cape Town Convention and Protocol of 2001, to which India was also a signatory.

The aircraft lessors have raised concerns over the Resolution Professional (“RP”) alleged failure to uphold legal standards in maintaining the aircraft. In response to these concerns, the Court has sought clarification regarding the roles of both the RP and DGCA. It's worth noting that Go First Airlines had a total debt of approximately INR 114.63 Billion since the insolvency proceedings commenced in May 2023.

Seeking the notification published by MCA as discussed above, RP has asked for an adjournment in the disputed case to consult with the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) and understand the further course of action.

Litigation Brief

Supreme Court Unveils Blueprint for Validating and Enforcing Wills

CASE ANALYSIS: Meena Pradhan & Ors. vs. Kamla Pradhan & Anr., Civil Appeal No.3351 Of 2014

Decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 21st September, 2023

Factual Matrix:

  1. The factual matrix of the present case is that a man named Bahadur Pradhan (“Testator”) had two marriages, one with Meena Pradhan, and they had two children, Ravi Kumar and Kumari Sushma. The Testator divorced his first wife and married Kamla Pradhan, with whom he had a child named Kumari Ritu.
  2. Just a week before the Testator passed away in 1992, he made a Will on July 30th, 1992. He did this in front of two witnesses, Lok Bahadur Thapa (who wasn't examined) and Suraj Bahadur Limboo (who was a witness in the case).
  3. After the Testator's death, the second wife along with her child (“Plaintiffs”) filed a case to claim the Testator's assets. Initially, a succession certificate was granted to Respondent No.1 by the Ld. Additional District Judge in Jabalpur on July 5, 1995.
  4. However, this decision was later overturned by the Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh on November 17, 1995. The High Court cancelled the entire proceeding, stating that the authenticity and genuineness of the will needed to be determined in the right legal proceedings.
  5. Following the High Court's decision, both Plaintiffs initiated proceedings under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 to obtain Probate or Letter of Administration. The Defendants (first wife with her children) contested the validity of the Will favoring the Plaintiffs, also questioning the Testator's marriage to Plaintiff No.1.
  6. Ultimately, the Civil Court in Jabalpur upheld the Will's validity in favor of the beneficiaries based on the testimony of a witness, Suraj Bahadur Limboo. The Defendants appealed this decision, but the High Court affirmed it, rejecting their claim that the Will was forged. Hence, the Appeal was filed by the Defendants before Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order of Hon’ble High Court.

Issue in question:

Whether there are sufficient grounds that warrant interference regarding upholding validity of a Will.

Held:

  1. The division bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court relied on various judgments to outline important principles for establishing the validity and execution of a Will:
  • A valid will must follow the formalities of Section 63 of the Succession Act, including the testator's signature or mark, attestation by two or more witnesses, and their acknowledgment.
  • To establish a will's execution, the court considers the testator's intent and whether it's their last will, not requiring absolute proof but prudent satisfaction.
  • At least one living attesting witness must testify to the will's execution, confirming signatures and presence.
  • If one attesting witness proves the will's execution, others' testimony can be omitted.
  • When doubts arise, the burden to remove suspicions falls on the propounder of the will.
  • The judicial conscience test assesses factors like the testator's awareness, soundness of mind and free will during execution.
  • Allegations of fraud, fabrication or undue influence require proof, however, if doubts arises, they still need convincing explanations by the propounder.
  • Suspicious circumstances must be real and relevant, not mere fantasies, and depend on the unique case's facts.
  • Shaky signatures, unfair property distribution, or personal benefit to the propounder can raise legitimate suspicions.
  1. The Hon’ble Court further enumerated conditions for upholding validity of a will, wherein in addition to meeting the legal requirements of Section 63 of the Succession Act, it must be demonstrated that:
  • the person creating the will did so willingly,
  • they were of sound mind when they made it,
  • they understood the content and impact of the will, and
  • the will was not created under suspicious circumstances.
  1. Applying such principles on case at hand, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in absence of any suspicious circumstances or element of undue influence at the time of execution of will, the Hon’ble High Court has rightly examined the compliance of relevant provisions in upholding validity of the Will. In view of the above, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Appeal.

Condonable period under limitation act shall stand extended w.e.f. 15th march 2020 

Case Referred: Aditya Khaitan & Ors. vs. IL and FS Financial Services Limited

[Civil Appeal Nos. 6411-6418 OF 2023]

A two judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court, comprising of Justice J.K Maheshwari and Justice K.V Vishwanathan, observed that “the benefit of the series of orders passed by the Supreme Court in In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, extending the period of limitation in light of the Covid-19 pandemic, expanded the protection to litigants by making it applicable to the period up to which delay can be condoned and not just to the period of limitation.”                     

In this case, the period of 30 days to file the written statements had expired on 08.03.2020. On 06.06.2020, the further condonable period of 90 days also expired. The Appellants on 20.01.2021 filed application seeking condonation of delay on the ground of Covid -19 pandemic. The Hon’ble Court of Calcutta dismissed the applications holding that that the order dated 23.03.2020 passed by this Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 [In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation], which is to be effective from 15.03.2020 would not enure to the benefit of the applicants/defendants since the limitation period for filing the written statements had expired on 08.03.2020.

The Apex Court relied on the judgment titled Prakash Corporates vs. Dee Vee Projects Limited, (2022) 5 SCC 112 and the Orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021 passed in In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation by Hon’ble Supreme Court and allowed the application dated 20.01.2021 seeking condonation of delay holding it to be well within the time.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that When the whole world was in the grip of devastating pandemic, it could never have been said that the parties were] sleeping over their rights. It is, at this juncture, that this Court stepped in and after taking suo motu cognizance passed orders under Article 142 of the Constitution of India extending the deadlines. The extraordinary situation was dealt with rightly by extraordinary orders protecting the rights of parties by ensuring that their remedies and defences were not barred. In view of these findings and observations, the present appeal was allowed.   

Provisions of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of CPC are not a mandate for the Court’s exercising powers under Section 9 of the A&C Act

IN THE MATTER OF: Prathyush- AMR JV versus Orissa Steel Expressway Private Limited

(Pronounced by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta on 27.09.2023 in AP 863 of 2022 & AP 370 of 2023)

Facts:

  1. The captioned petition bearing AP 863 of 2023 (“First Petition”) has been preferred under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) and petition bearing AP 370 of 2023 (“Second Petition”) has been preferred seeking interim protection under Section 9(1) of the Act.
  2. The prayer for appointment of an Arbitrator was on the basis of an EPC Contract dated 27.07.2013, wherein, the Petitioner was engaged as a sub-contractor by the Respondent. However, the principal employer was the National Highways Authority of India (“NHAI”).
  3. Due to constant delay in the completion of the project and breach of the agreed terms, a separate arbitration proceeding was underway between the Respondent and the NHAI. Upon information, the Petitioner vide letter dated 20.06.2017, submitted documents in support of its claim to the Respondent, in order to enable the Respondent to include the same in the pending arbitration proceeding.
  4. On 09.05.2019, the Respondent informed the Petitioner that an award of INR 322.78 crores have been awarded in its favour, which does not include the Claim of the Petitioner, the Respondent alleged that the claim of the Petitioner is independent in nature.
  5. Due to the parties’ inability to iron out the differences, the Petitioner was constrained to invoke the arbitration clause enshrined under the EPC contract. The Respondent disputed the appointment of an Arbitrator alleging that the claims are time barred in nature and that the EPC contract was on a “back to back” basis.
  6. It is under these foregoing circumstances that the Petitioner filed a petition under Section 11(6) of the Act for appointment of an arbitrator and an application under Section 9 (1) of the Act seeking a direction against the Respondent to secure an amount of INR 76 crores (from the amount that was awarded under the arbitration with the principal employer). 

Issues before the Court:

  1. Whether Application filed u/s 11 (6) is maintainable?
  2. Whether a Court exercising powers under Section 9 of the Act is strictly bound to follow the provisions of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the CPC?

 Court Observations and Findings:

  1. While considering the first issue, the Hon’ble Court observed that even when cause of action arose in the year 2018, the Respondent, vide email dated 11.05.2018 has duly acknowledged the debt by confirming that it would include the claims of the Petitioner in the arbitration proceedings pending with the NHAI. Further, it was observed that given circumstances would attract Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 leading to a fresh start of limitation.
  2. The Hon’ble Court while considering the documents placed on record, observed that the entire history of negotiation is also material to the question of limitation, the Hon’ble Court further observed that “cause of action” after all is nothing but facts taken together which are crucial to prove the reliefs claimed.
  3. Thus, in respect of the First Petition, the Hon’ble Court appointed an Arbitrator and directed that the Petitioner’s claim including the question of limitation, if any, would be adjudicated by the Arbitrator.
  4. In respect of the second issue, the Hon’ble Court held that contrary to Order XXXVII Rule 5 of CPC, wherein the Applicant has to substantiate that the other party would seek to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree, Section 9 of the Act does not require the Petitioner to show that the opposite party would dissipate the subject matter of the arbitration.
  5. The Hon’ble Court, while contemplating the scope of Section 9 (1) of the Act, also observed that a party who approached the Court seeking relief in time-sensitive matters cannot be drawn and quartered by being relegated to the restrictions of Order XXXVII Rule 5. Moreover, adopting the approach of Order XXXVII Rule 5 would in fact defeat the whole purpose of the timely, effective and focused interim relief proposed to be granted under Section 9(1) of the Act.
  6. Thus, on the above premise, Second Petition was also allowed by the Hon’ble High Court and the Respondent was directed to deposit INR 76.32 crores with the Registrar within two weeks from the date of the Judgement.

***

Disclaimer:

For private circulation to the addressee only and not for re-circulation. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/ or publication of this Newsletter is strictly prohibited. This Newsletter is not intended to be an advertisement or solicitation. The contents of this Newsletter are solely meant to inform and is not a substitute for legal advice. Legal advice should be obtained based on the specific circumstances of each case, before relying on the contents of this Newsletter or prior to taking any decision based on the information contained in this Newsletter. ZEUS Law disclaims all responsibility and accepts no liability for the consequences of any person acting, or refraining from acting, on such information. If you have received this Newsletter in error, please notify us immediately by telephone.

Copyright © 2014 ZEUS Law. All rights reserved. Replication or redistribution of content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of ZEUS Law.


Data Protection for India’s FinTech @Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

Data Protection for India’s FinTech @Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

Author: Jayshree Chandra, Senior Partner & Divij Poddar, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunityne

For half a decade, the Indian policymakers have deliberated on data legislation. Finally, the fourth iteration of the data protection bill received the President’s assent on 11th August 2023 – the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (the Act). It is lean, principle-based, and unquestionably essential – its urgency could not have been overstated.

Among the most thriving sectors in the Indian economy is the FinTech ecosystem, a data behemoth. Initially included in the definition of sensitive personal data, financial data remains one of the most vulnerable datasets in the world. Independent of a legislative framework, the RBI has stepped up as an effective regulator for financial data for FinTech players and its regulated entities. RBI regulations and compliances, inter alia, include RBI’s guidelines on digital lending, which promotes transparency, data minimization and purpose limitation; notification on storage of payment system data which mandates data localization; and the notification restricting the storage of actual card data by entities other than card issuers and card networks.

As per the Act, the following two entities handle data:

  1. Data fiduciaries: those who are entrusted with the data of the data principals and shoulder the entire liability under the Act; and
  2. Data processors: those who process the data on behalf of the data fiduciaries and undertake mere contractual obligations against the data fiduciaries.

In the FinTech ecosystem, the entities must first know whether they are a fiduciary or a processor. Many FinTech companies perform neobanking activities while also acting as service providers to banks/ non-banks. The distinction between the two is activity-specific and depends on who is processing or merely collecting data; therefore, one must understand what kind of entity they are before streamlining and setting up processes for complying with the Act. Let’s take, for instance, when a service provider handles the bank’s customers' data on behalf of the bank, it functions as a processor, while on the other hand, the provider will act as a fiduciary when it collects its own employees’ data, whether to train and educate its AI model or for any other permitted purpose.

While the Act has an entire chapter dedicated to data fiduciaries, it is largely silent on the obligations of the data processors simply because as per the Act, they bear minimum to no liability. This overlooks a crucial aspect, considering that ultimately,, it is the processors who are entrusted with the principal’s data by the data fiduciaries as long as the principals have consented to it (which they can withdraw at any given point). The Act leaves it to the fiduciary and the processor to determine their obligations and duties in the form of a service or outsourcing agreement or any other valid contract.

Another important feature of the Act is the recognition of consent managers. This is a person who is registered with the data protection board and acts as a single point of contact to enable a data principal to give, manage, review, and withdraw her consent through an accessible, transparent, and interoperable platform. Account aggregators of the FinTech ecosystem may be regarded and included within the definition of consent managers as provided under the Act. These are data-blind consent managers that enable consumers and enterprises to move their data between two financial institutions/ platforms enabling them to leverage the potential of aggregating and combining fragmented and siloed financial data from consumers nationwide. Simply put, they allow consumers to access their financial accounts securely and efficiently, in one place, without having to log in to multiple platforms to view and manage their accounts. Therefore, read with RBI’s Master Direction on Account Aggregators, 2016, the account aggregators will also come under the purview of the Act, within the meaning of consent managers. The rights and obligations of the consent managers are yet to be ascertained as rules in this regard are still awaited.

 

The Act marks a significant stride forward for India's data protection landscape. While the Act addresses a crucial need for safeguarding personal data in a rapidly evolving digital era, its implementation will require a nuanced understanding of roles and responsibilities, particularly within the FinTech ecosystem, as well as a proper review of the rules and regulations that will be prescribed by the Central Government. The Act’s recognition of data fiduciaries and processors, along with the innovative concept of consent managers, underscores the importance of transparency, accountability, and user control over their data. As the FinTech ecosystem continues to flourish, the Act’s provisions will undoubtedly play a pivotal role in shaping how financial data is managed and secured. However, as the regulatory framework takes shape, careful attention must be given to bridging the gap in obligations for data processors, ensuring that the data protection realm remains robust and effective.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Mr. Divij Poddar is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.

 


Taiwan Expo: More than 50 Taiwanese firms exploring new supply chain partners from India

Taiwan Expo: More than 50 Taiwanese firms exploring new supply chain partners from India

Author: Pankhuri Jain, Partner & Pari Bhardwaj, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 04th October, 2023

The time has come for India and Taiwan to embark upon the journey of reimagining their economic relationship. Having historically maintained ‘unofficial’ ties, there has been a notable shift in recent years with an aim to foster more robust official economic ties. After facing a series of shocks in the global supply chain right from the pandemic, the World Trade Report 2023 has brought a new journey of re-globalisation for the countries[1]. Therefore, India, being one of the 14th largest export destinations and the 18th largest source of imports for Taiwan[2], has been invited to participate in the Taiwan Expo, which is scheduled from October 5 to 7, 2023, in Mumbai. More than 50 Taiwanese firms will be actively exploring new supply chain partners from India at the Expo, and this opens a promising window to strengthen bilateral commercial relationships with the country.

India-Taiwan Economic Relationship

Before delving into the recent globalisation strengthening the Bilateral commercial relationship, let’s get a gist of the history of the India-Taiwan economic relationship.

Taiwan and India started to approach each other after the Indian Government initiated the “Look East Policy” in early 1991 by loosening visa restrictions on each other. Representative offices of both countries were established in each other’s capitals, namely the Taipei Economic & Culture Centre (TECC) in New Delhi and the India Taipei Association (ITA) in Taipei, promoting economic ties between the countries.

Taiwan’s foreign policy outlook has experienced a great transformation under the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) administration. The Tsai Ing-Wen Administration launched ‘New Southbound Policy’ in 2016[3], to shift the approach and put a greater emphasis on enhancing its outreach to the immediate and extended neighbourhood.

Recognizing the pitfalls of being overly reliant on a solitary market, Taiwan has turned its gaze towards India as a key player in its external interactions. Taiwan is actively seeking to broaden its economic horizons, while India aspires to cement its position as a compelling alternative hub in the intricate tapestry of the global supply chain. Against the backdrop of current geopolitical and economic shifts, a window of opportunity has opened up for India and Taiwan to chart a course of collaboration aimed at attaining shared and advantageous objectives.

Bilateral trade between the two countries totaled US$8.45 billion in 2022, representing an increase of 9.8% over the previous year. In 2022, India's exports to Taiwan amounted to US$3.14 billion, consisting of mineral fuels, aluminium, iron, steel, organic chemicals, plastics, and articles thereof, while Taiwan's exports to India amounted to US$5.31 billion, consisting primarily of plastics, electronic integrated circuits, organic chemicals, electrical machinery, iron, and steel.[4]

Commercial bonds form the cornerstone of their bilateral ties, and recent developments vividly illustrate the promising potential of their cooperative endeavours.

Legal ties between the countries affecting the supply chain agreements

India expressed its willingness to advance commercial relations with Taiwan by initiating negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement to reduce barriers to imports and exports among them and signing the upgraded version of Bilateral Investment Treaty establishing the terms and conditions for private investment by nationals and companies. Both countries have signed a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) to avoid levying taxes twice on the same income, a Customs Mutual Assistance Agreement (CMAA) for free exchange of information and evidence to assist countries in the enforcement of customs laws, the ATA Carnet Protocol permitting duty-free temporary admission of goods into a member country without the need to raise customs bond, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Promotion of Industry Collaboration, and an MoU with India’s PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Commerce is the only domain where the countries are experiencing direct and open government interactions. These regulatory relaxations have paved the way for countries to welcome reciprocal investments and facilitate the smooth operation of supply chain agreements.

Way Forward

TECC is expanding its presence in India with a new representative office in Mumbai, strengthening its role in fostering collaboration between Taiwanese and Indian businesses. Currently, Taiwan External Trade Development Council (TAITRA) maintains four liaison offices across India in Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, and Mumbai, while in 2017, an India Center was established in Taipei to serve as a central resource hub, offering expertise and support to Taiwanese enterprises operating in India. Additionally, to facilitate[5][6]

In 2022, Taiwan initiated its willingness to share its expertise with India in critical sectors such as semiconductors, 5G, information security, and artificial intelligence, saying that the country can be an "excellent" partner in New Delhi's quest to become a hub for the manufacturing of cutting-edge electronics. And currently, when India is aspiring to gain a foothold in semiconductor manufacturing, Taiwan can be India’s potential partner. In August 2023, at the meeting organised by an inbound Taiwan Trade Mission at the World Trade Centre in Mumbai, Maharashtra was considered a promising investment destination due to its abundant skilled workers and being the leading industrial state of India. Both countries are also in talks to create an agreement enabling Indian labor migration to alleviate shortages in key sectors such as manufacturing, construction, household services, agriculture, and fisheries[7] under the Taiwan-India Agricultural Cooperation Agreement signed in 2016[8]. By making curative economic relationships, both countries are globalising and creating a cooperative ladder of economic relationships.

[1] https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/wtr23_e.htm

[2] https://agriexchange.apeda.gov.in/news/NewsSearch.aspx?newsid=50890

[3]https://newsouthboundpolicy.trade.gov.tw/Files/Pages/Attaches/11/%E6%96%B0%E5%8D%97%E5%90%913%E5%91%A8%E5%B9%B4%E6%89%8B%E5%86%8A.pdf

[4] https://agriexchange.apeda.gov.in/news/NewsSearch.aspx?newsid=50890

 [6]https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-role-of-commercial-ties-in-advancing-india-taiwan-relations/#_ftnref1

[7]https://www.tpci.in/indiabusinesstrade/news_buzz/india-taiwan-likely-to-sign-worker-migration-agreement/#:~:text=Taiwan%20and%20India%20are%20discussing,household%20workers%2C%20agriculture%20and%20fisheries.

[8]https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-role-of-commercial-ties-in-advancing-india-taiwan-relations/#_ftnref1


Social Media Security Norms for Indian Govt. entities

Social Media Security Norms for Government Entities

Author: Jayshree Chandra, Senior Partner & Anisha Jhawar, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 28th September 2023

Recently, Guidelines on Information Security Practices for Government Entities (‘Guidelines’) have been issued by Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), an organ of Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY).

The Guidelines apply to the ministries, departments, secretariats, and offices and entities associated with these government organisations. Apart from providing a legal blueprint for the cyber resilience, security measures and the controls required to be adopted by the government organisations and associated entities, the Guidelines also provide for the list of social media related security measures required to be adopted by such organisations and entities which include the following:

  • Restricting the access to official social media accounts and limiting the same to designated officials and systems only;
  • Using a dedicated/separate email account for operating the social media platform accounts and the credentials used for official social media platform account should be different from the credentials for official email account;
  • Specifying a password policy for usage of the credentials;
  • Prohibiting usage of personal email account for operating official social media account;
  • Enabling multi-factor authentication for all social media accounts;
  • Approving the content to be posted on social media handles by appropriate authority within the organisation;
  • Ensuring operation of the social media accounts by the designated officials, on trusted devices only (and not on public / unauthorised devices) and ensuring log out the same immediately after usage;
  • Disabling the Geolocation (GPS) access feature for official social media platforms;
  • Ensuring that the social media platform software/application used is updated to the latest available version, available security patches as well as security and privacy settings related to such software;
  • Revoking access by an employee to social media account with immediate effect in case he/she switches the role or his/her employment terminates or he leaves the organisation;
  • Enabling account security logs along with periodically monitoring of the log-in attempts from untrusted devices or log-in attempts from geographical regions other than the usual;
  • Enabling all alerts for unrecognized login attempts of social media platform/application;
  • Exercising caution for usage of all third-party applications used for managing social media platform accounts;
  • Regularly monitoring e-mail accounts associated with official social media accounts for any alerts received related to account activities.

The Guidelines reflect a stringent approach adopted by Cert-In as social media have increasingly become extremely vulnerable, being prone to cyber-attacks that may affect an organisation’s information systems and thus, compromising the confidentiality to far reaching consequences.

To continue their engagement and dealings with government organisations and associated entities, the contracting party(ies) providing third-party applications and rendering software services will be required to ramp up with the demands of government organisations and associated entities. The need of the hour emphasises for developing better security and privacy features in the applications and software.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Ms. Anisha Jhawar is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


Mrs. Prerna Kohli, the esteemed Founding and Senior Partner, offered valuable insights at the prestigious 2023 Korea-India Forum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIbMD-JZoaQ&list=PLdw0cBmZ4tBu_5HdPMXu4gZXXj5lCySKA&index=3

ZEUS Law Associates Wins Forbes India Award in the "Above 10 Years Law Firm" Category

ZEUS Law Associates proudly announces its prestigious win at the esteemed Forbes India Legal Power list 2022 Awards. In a highly competitive field, ZEUS Law Associates emerged as the victor in the "Above 10 Years Law Firm" category, reaffirming our steadfast commitment to legal excellence.

At the heart of this accomplishment are the remarkable contributions of our esteemed legal team. Founding and Senior Partner, Mrs. Prerna Kohli, along with Sandeep Bhuraria, Senior Partner, and Yeshi Rinchhen, Partner, attended the prestigious event and proudly collected the award on behalf of ZEUS Law Associates.

The Forbes India Legal Power list 2022 Awards honour exceptional achievements and contributions by prominent legal practitioners and firms across India. This award underscores ZEUS Law Associates' position as a pioneering entity in the legal sphere.

Mrs. Prerna Kohli, Founding and Senior Partner at ZEUS Law Associates, expressed her delight, saying, "We are thrilled to receive this prestigious award from Forbes India. It serves as a testament to our dedication to providing exceptional legal services to our clients. This recognition is a result of the collective efforts of our entire team."

At ZEUS Law Associates, we believe in offering not just legal services but comprehensive legal solutions that cater to the diverse needs of our clients. Our winning formula combines legal expertise with a client-centric approach, ensuring the best possible outcomes.

About ZEUS Law Associates:

ZEUS Law Associates is a distinguished law firm renowned for its unwavering commitment to excellence and professionalism. With a team of highly experienced legal professionals, ZEUS Law Associates provides a broad spectrum of legal services, ranging from corporate and commercial law to litigation and dispute resolution. Our mission is to deliver innovative, strategic, and customized legal solutions to meet the unique requirements of our clients.


ZEUS Newsletter September, 2023

Highlights:

Corporate Brief

  • Notification dated 02.08.2023 issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs (“MCA”) on the Companies (Incorporation) Second Amendment Rules, 2023.
  • Circular dated 03.08.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) regarding offer for Sale framework for sale of units of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs).
  • Circular dated 04.08.2023 issued by SEBI regarding validity period of approval granted by SEBI to Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) and Venture Capital Funds (VCFs) for overseas investment.
  • Updates dated 04.08.2023 in Master Circular dated 31.07.2023 issued by SEBI for Online Dispute Resolution.
  • Circular dated 07.08.2023 issued by SEBI regarding transactions in Corporate Bonds through Request for Quote (RFQ) platform by FPIs.
  • Circular dated 09.08.2023 issued by SEBI regarding Reduction of timeline for listing of shares in Public Issue from existing T+6 days to T+3 days.
  • Circular dated 11.08.2023 issued by SEBI regarding timeline for the Exit Option Window Period for Change in Control of AMC.
  • Notification dated 18.08.2023 issued by RBI on Fair Lending Practice - Penal Charges in Loan Accounts.
  • Notification dated 18.08.2023 issued by RBI on Review of Regulatory Framework for IDF-NBFCs.
  • General Circular dated 23.08.2023 issued by MCA regarding condonation of delay in filing of Form-3, Form-4 and Form-11 under section 67 of Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 read with section 460 of the Companies Act, 2013- reg.
  • Circular dated 24.08.2023 issued by SEBI mandating additional disclosures by Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) that fulfil certain objective criteria.

RERA Brief

  • Notice dated 01.08.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bihar (“Bihar RERA”) regarding disclosure of division of share of the project through an Affidavit.
  • Press Release dated 03.08.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Uttar Pradesh (“UP RERA”) regarding suo moto action against non-compliance of UP RERA order by promoter.
  • Office Order dated 08.08.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bihar regarding SOP for dealing with the Projects where the date of completion has been exceeded and Project has come under lapsed category.
  • Circular dated 11.08.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Goa (“Goa RERA”) regarding adherence to model format of Agreement for Sale (AFS).
  • Order dated 19.08.2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Kerala (“Kerala RERA”) regarding display of QR code in every project promotion advertisement.

NCLT Brief

  • M/s IFCI Ltd. Vs. Sutanu Sinha (Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 108/2023)

Litigation Brief

  • High Courts should not entertain Writ Petitions in Commercial matters in case of existence of an alternative remedy
  • Stamping out Uncertainty: Delhi High Court's Ruling on Appointment of Arbitrators Vis-À-Vis Unstamped Arbitration Agreements
  • Decoding the meaning of “Commercial purpose” in Consumer Protection Act

 Corporate Brief

 The Companies (Incorporation) Second Amendment Rules, 2023. 

  • The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has issued the Companies (Incorporation) Second Amendment Rules, 2023. These rules introduce amendments to Form No. RD-1 in the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014. Vide said Amendment revised Form No. RD-1 has been introduced which is to be used by companies for filing application to Central Government (Regional Director) for approval of Compromises, Arrangements, Amalgamations and conversions.

Circular dated 03.08.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) regarding offer for Sale framework for sale of units of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs). 

  • SEBI vide its Circular dated 03.08.2023, introduced a comprehensive framework for Offer for Sale (OFS) of shares, including units of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs) through stock exchange mechanisms. In response to market feedback, Paragraph B of the said circular has been amended to permit OFS for units of privately listed InvITs.

Circular dated 04.08.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) regarding validity period of approval granted by SEBI to Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) and Venture Capital Funds (VCFs) for overseas investment. 

  • In accordance with SEBI Circular No. SEBI/VCF/Cir no. 1/98645/2007 dated 09.08.2007, and SEBI Master Circular No. SEBI/HO/AFD/PoD1/P/CIR/2023/130 dated 31.07.2023, both Venture Capital Funds (VCFs) and Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) were granted a six-month time limit from SEBI's prior approval date for investing in offshore venture capital undertakings. If this limit was not utilized within six months, SEBI could allocate the unutilized limit to other applicant AIFs/VCFs.
  • However, as per recommendations from the Alternative Investments Policy Advisory Committee, this circular reduces the time limit for overseas investments by AIFs/VCFs from six to four months. This change aims to enhance the efficient utilization of allocated limits, ensuring quicker availability to the AIF industry if unutilized. These provisions apply to overseas investment approvals granted by SEBI after the circular's issuance.

Updates dated 04.08.2023 in Master Circular dated 31.07.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) for Online Dispute Resolution. 

  • The Master Circular for Online Dispute Resolution dated 31.07.2023 has been updated as on 04.08.2023 and these updates introduce several key changes to the existing framework. The specific amendments carried out in the said Master Circular may be referred to at the link below:

https://www.sebi.gov.in/legal/master-circulars/aug-2023/online-resolution-of-disputes-in-the-indian-securities-market_75220.html 

Circular dated 07.08.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) regarding transactions in Corporate Bonds through Request for Quote (RFQ) platform by FPIs 

  • In an effort to enhance liquidity on RFQ platform vis-avis trading in corporate bonds by FPIs, SEBI has introduced new requirements for Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs).
  • As per this circular, FPIs are now required to conduct at least 10% of their total secondary market trades in Corporate Bonds by value by placing/seeking quotes on the Request for Quote (RFQ) platform of stock exchanges on a quarterly basis.
  • This requirement is effective from October 1, 2023.

Circular dated 09.08.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) Reduction of timeline for listing of shares in Public Issue from existing T+6 days to T+3 days.

  • SEBI vide its circular dated 09.08.2023, introduces a significant change in the timeline for listing of shares in Public Issue.
  • Following consultations with market participants and public feedback, SEBI has decided to reduce the time taken for listing of specified securities after the closure of public issue to 3 working days (T+3 days) as against the present requirement of 6 working days (T+6 days); ‘T’ being issue closing date. The T+3 listing timeline is also required to be appropriately disclosed in the Offer Documents of public issues.
  • Detailed instructions are provided for Direct Bank ASBA and Syndicate ASBA applications, including PAN verification.
  • The said circular also specifies the applicability dates, with voluntary adoption starting from September 1, 2023, and mandatory adoption from December 1, 2023. It modifies the timelines prescribed in previous SEBI circulars, ultimately streamlining the listing process for specified securities in public issues to T+3 days.

Circular dated 11.08.2023 issued by SEBI regarding timeline for the Exit Option Window Period for Change in Control of AMC.

  • This circular addresses the timeline for the exit option window period in the event of a change in control of an Asset Management Company (AMC).
  • Following recommendations of the Mutual Funds Advisory Committee (MFAC), para 17.8.1 (III) of the SEBI Master Circular no. SEBI/HO/IMD/IMD-PoD-1/P/CIR/2023/74 issued on May 19, 2023 is modified vide this circular. Unitholders are now provided an option to exit on the prevailing Net Asset Value (NAV) without any exit load within a time period not less than 15 calendar days from the date of communication and in cases of change in control leading to consolidation or merger of schemes, within a time period not less than 30 calendar days from the date of communication.
  • All other provisions in the master circular remain unchanged, and AMCs are advised to implement these changes within one month from the date of this circular.

Notification dated 18.08.2023 issued by RBI on Fair Lending Practice - Penal Charges in Loan Accounts. 

  • The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has issued this notification to all Commercial Banks, Primary (Urban) Co-operative Banks, Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs), and Financial Institutions regarding fair lending practices and penal charges in loan accounts.
  • The said notification dated 18.08.2023 may be referred to at the link below:

https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=12527&Mode=0 

Notification dated 18.08.2023 issued by RBI on Review of Regulatory Framework for IDF-NBFCs

The RBI notification dated 18.08.2023 introduced a review of regulations for Infrastructure Debt Fund-NBFCs (IDF-NBFCs) to enhance their role in infrastructure financing and align them with existing NBFC regulations. The revised regulatory framework for IDF-NBFCs is provided in the Annex. These guidelines shall come into effect from the date of this circular.

  • The said notification outlines fund-raising options, exposure limits, risk weights, and requirements regarding sponsors and tripartite agreements. It also applies income recognition, asset classification, and provisioning norms similar to NBFC-Investment and Credit Companies (NBFC-ICCs) to IDF-NBFCs. It also provides guidelines for NBFCs interested in sponsoring Infrastructure Debt Fund-Mutual Funds (IDF-MFs).
  • The said notification dated 18.08.2023 may be referred to at the link below:

https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=12528&Mode=0

General Circular dated 23.08.2023 issued by MCA regarding condonation of delay in filing of Form-3, Form-4 and Form-11 under section 67 of Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 read with section 460 of the Companies Act, 2013- reg. 

  • The Ministry has received representations regarding challenges faced by certain Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) in filing Form-3, Form-4, and Form-11 due to various reasons, including discrepancies in electronic registry data.
  • To address these difficulties faced by the LLPs and as part of Government's constant efforts to promote ease of doing business, the Ministry, in exercise of its power under section 67 of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008, has decided to grant one-time relaxation in additional fees to those LLPs who could not file the Form-3, Form-4 and Form-11 within due date and provide an opportunity to update their filings and details in Master-data for future compliances.
  • The salient features include:
  1. The filing of Form-3 and Form-4 without additional fee shall be applicable for the event dates 01.01.2021 and onwards. For events dated prior to 01.01.2021, these forms can be filed with 02 times and 04 times of normal filing fees as additional fee for small LLPs and Other than small LLPs respectively.
  2. The filing of Form-11 without additional fee shall be applicable for the financial year 2021-22 onwards. Form-11 for previous years (prior to financial year 2021-22) can be filed with 02 times and 04 times of normal filing fee as additional fee for small LLPs and Other than small LLPS respectively.
  3. These forms shall be available for filing from 01.09.2023 onwards till 30.11.2023 (both dates inclusive).
  4. The LLPs availing the scheme shall not be liable for any action for delayed filing of the Form-3, Form-4 and Form-11.

Circular dated 24.08.2023 issued by SEBI mandating additional disclosures by Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) that fulfil certain objective criteria 

  • SEBI's circular dated 24.08.2023, mandates additional disclosures for Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) meeting specific criteria.
  • In order to obtain granular information of persons having any ownership, economic interest, or control in some objectively identified FPIs, Regulations 22 (6) and 22(7) have been inserted in the SEBI (FPI) Regulations, 2019 (‘FPI Regulations’), vide SEBI (Foreign Portfolio Investors) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2023, notified on August 10, 2023.
  • In terms of Regulations 22 (6) and 22 (7) of the FPI Regulations, the criteria rendering FPIs liable to provide information or documents in relation to the persons with any ownership, economic interest, or control, in the FPI, and the manner for providing the same is being specified in this circular.
  • The said circular dated 24.08.2023 may be referred to at the link below:

https://www.sebi.gov.in/legal/circulars/aug-2023/mandating-additional-disclosures-by-foreign-portfolio-investors-fpis-that-fulfil-certain-objective-criteria_75886.html

RERA Brief

Notice no: 115 dated 01.08.2023 issued by Bihar RERA regarding disclosure of division of share of the project through an Affidavit.

As per Notice issued by the Bihar RERA on 01.08.2023, in order to avoid litigation regarding share of promoter and landowner in the project available for selling and marketing, a notice was earlier issued by Bihar RERA on 01.07.2022 vide No. 60 for disclosure of share of promoter in the project through an affidavit. However, it was noticed that in some cases promoters submit the memorandum of division of share signed between promoter and landowners on stamp paper in compliance of one of the conditions of development agreement.

As per this Notice dated 01.08.2023, promoter would henceforth, submit the details of division of share of the project available for marketing and selling on Affidavit duly executed between promoter and landowner/s in a particular format with the application to be submitted for the registration of project. The said direction has come into force with immediate effect for all the applications to be submitted henceforth for registration. The format for such declaration is also attached with the said notice.

Press Release dated 03.08.2023 issued UP RERA regarding suo moto action against non-compliance of UP RERA order by promoter. 

As per the press release dated 03.08.2023, the ADJ Bench of the UP RERA, in the interest of homebuyers, exercised its statutory rights and itself got the sale deed executed and registered in favour of the complainant homebuyer where after constant persistence, the promoter was not registering the sale deed in favour of the aggrieved homebuyer.

This step would send a message to the promoters that UP RERA will continue to fulfil the responsibility of safeguarding the interest of the homebuyers by taking actions as per the rules formulated.

As per the UP RERA, it is the responsibility of UP RERA to protect the transparency between the promoter and the homebuyer and it shall continue to enforce the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA Act”) in the state. 

Office Order: dated 08.08.2023, issued by Bihar RERA regarding SOP for dealing with the Projects where the date of completion, as mentioned in the application for registration, has been exceeded, Project has come under lapsed category and application for extension is not submitted within time.

As per Office Order dated 08.08.2023 of Bihar RERA, it was acknowledged that there have been various instances where the promoter of a real estate project failed to renew the validity of a project registered with RERA within the stipulated time. To safeguard the interest of the allottees in such an instance, the Authority had earlier offered a General Amnesty Scheme and allowed the promoters to apply for extension with additional amount of fees up to a maximum period of delay of 2 (two) years.

The validity of the Amnesty Scheme was over and therefore, Bihar RERA had to streamline a procedure to be adopted by the office for dealing with such applications that are received for extension.

As per the SOP issued by the Authority, which comes into force with immediate effect, if the promoter submits an application, in prescribed format, for extension stating the compelling reasons / circumstances for failure to complete the project on time and satisfy the Authority in believing that the project is near completion, then such case would be referred firstly to the Legal Section.

All applications received from promoters:

  • would contain the consent of 2/3rd (two-third) of allottees of the project that they want to get the remaining development work to be carried out by the same promoter and they have no objection if the period of completion is extended.
  • be examined for any pending complaint against the project. If any complaint case is pending, then the decision of the Presiding Officer will be given deciding whether such project needs to be extended or not.

However, if no complaint case is pending:

  • The said matter would be referred to compliance wing to check whether the obligations are being met by the promoter and the requisite reports are being reported regularly. The department ensures the compliance and the deposition of the requisite penalty amount.
  • The compliance of the conditions shall be examined by the Bihar RERA along with the examination of the application documents as prescribed under the relevant provisions of the RERA Act along with the Rules made thereunder being duly submitted.
  • The department will then examine the exceptional circumstances as pleaded by the promoter in the application along with other compliances required.
  • The map of the project will also be an essential parameter to be considered by the department.
  • After being satisfied of the above conditions, the period of delay (which was limited to 2 years under the General Amnesty Scheme may then be extended.
  • For delay of every quarter, promoter needs to submit additional fees for delay at the rate of 50% (fifty per cent) of the registration fees.

The final extension will be provided by the Authority only after being satisfied of whether the time proposed by the promoter to complete the project is reasonable or not. It has been clarified in the said Office Order dated 08.08.2023 that it shall not be interpreted to mean that in every case a promoter who fails to complete the project under the extended time under section6 would get further extension as of right to complete the remaining development work.

Circular No. No: 1/RERA/Circulars/2019/798 dated 11.08.2023 issued by Goa RERA regarding adherence to model format of Agreement for Sale (AFS).

As per Circular dated 11.08.2023, it has been mentioned that Goa RERA has come across several complaints that some builders are incorporating restrictive clauses in the AFS and are deviating from Model AFS Rules notified by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, New Delhi.

It was further mentioned in the said circular that despite some leeway provided, depending upon circumstances of each case, by the Rule 10(1) and 10(2) under Agreement for Sale along with explanatory note to the Model Form of Agreement notified by Goa RERA, there are certain mandatory clauses which need to be strictly retained by the promoters in the AFS executed between the promoter and the Allottee. Also, any change in the agreement found contrary to or inconsistent with any provisions of the Act, Rules and Regulations would be void-ab-initio.

In view of the same, Goa RERA, vide its circular dated 11.08.2023 has directed that all existing as well as prospective promoters under the Goa RERA to adhere to the Model format of AFS.

Order No. K-RERA/T3/2127/2023 dated 19.08.2023 issued by Kerala RERA regarding display of QR code in every project promotion advertisement.

As per Order of Kerala RERA dated 19.08.2023, in exercise of the powers conferred on the Authority under Section 37 of the RERA Act, i.e., to issue directions to promoter, real estate agents and allottees from time to time, the Kerala RERA has issued the following direction:

  • The promoter shall prominently display QR code on each and every project advertisement, 01.09.2023 onwards.
  • Such QR Code must be legible, readable and detectable with software application.
  • The QR Code of each registered project is made available for download in the promoters dashboard located close to the certificate download section.
  • Such QR Code must be published besides the Kerala RERA Registration Number and the website address.
  • Mediums of advertisements on which it applies include newspaper, magazines, journals, printed flyers, brochures, catalogues, leaflets, prospectus, standees on project sites, sales office, websites, webpages, social media platforms or any other medium where QR Code can be published.

NCLT Brief

Case Referred- M/s IFCI Ltd. Vs. Sutanu Sinha (Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 108/2023)

Issue: Whether the Compulsorily Convertible Debentures (“CCD”) would be treated as equity or as a debt instrument for the purpose of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (“Code”) and whether the amount due and payable from the CCD would fall within the definition of ‘Financial Debt’ as defined under the Code?

Brief Facts of the Case

IVRCL Limited (“IVRCL”) won a bid in April 2009 for undertaking construction, operation, and maintenance of a project under ‘National Highway Authority of India’ (“NHAI”). Pursuant thereto, a concession agreement was entered into between the subsidiary of IVRCL, i.e., IVRCL Chengapalli Tollways Limited (“Corporate Debtor”) and NHAI for the execution of the said project. Furthermore, IFCI Bank (“Appellant”) agreed to provide financial assistance to the Corporate Debtor for execution of the project through CCDs issued by the Corporate Debtor.

The Appellant had agreed to subscribe to CCDs amounting to Rs. 12.5 crores vide a ‘Debenture Subscription Agreement’ (“DSA”). The Corporate Debtor, IVRCL and the Appellant entered into a share buy-back agreement dated 14.10.2011, wherein the terms and conditions of the buy-back of aforementioned CCDs subscribed by the Appellant were mentioned. Furthermore, DSA empowered Appellant to sell the CCDs to a third party.  

Vide order dated 20.04.2020, the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Branch (“NCLT”) initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) of IVRCL. Pursuant thereto, the Appellant filed a claim with the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor; however, the same was rejected. Subsequently, the Appellant filed an application challenging the rejection of claim before the NCLT and the NCLT upheld the decision of the resolution professional rejecting the claim of the Appellant.

The NCLT held that the CCDs subscribed by the appellant was to be treated as equity and not as debt. The NCLT also held that the CCDs cannot acquire the status of debt on default because interest on CCDs is to be paid by the sponsor, i.e., IVRCL, the holding company of Corporate Debtor and the Corporate Debtor was not under any obligation to pay interest on the borrowing.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (“NCLAT”). 

Observation and Decision of NCLAT

The NCLAT held that in the present case, the CCDs had matured before the initiation of CIRP proceedings of the Corporate Debtor. The NCLAT observed that it is evident from the record that the investment was in the form of debentures which would be converted into equity. Furthermore, the terms and conditions of the DSA and the parties intent did not specify anywhere that the instrument would acquire the nature of a financial debt in the occurrence of any event which was evident from the provisions of the Loan Agreement and the Concession Agreement executed between NHAI and the Corporate Debtor, which define equity to include CCDs as part of the Project's equity component.

Thus, the NCLAT held that the CCDs are equity instruments and do not fall within the definition of Financial Debt as defined under Section 5(8) of the Code. Hence, the NCLAT dismissed the appeal.

Litigation Brief

High Courts should not entertain Writ Petitions in Commercial matters in case of existence of an alternative remedy

Case referred: M/S. South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip & Anr. etc. Civil Appeal No. 002861 – 002862 / 2023

The two-judge bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh held that in commercial matters, litigants cannot be permitted to bypass the route of approaching tribunals.

The Supreme Court had taken note of the issue of non-functional Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals (DRATs) and requested the relevant High Courts to handle cases falling under their jurisdiction through Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. In the present case, the Borrowers challenged a Notice issued by the Bank under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act by filing a writ petition before the Kerala High Court. The High Court instructed the Bank to consider the Borrowers' repayment proposal and allowed them to repay the dues in installments. However, the Borrowers failed to comply with the arrangement. Consequently, the Bank issued notices under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act to the Borrowers in December 2021.

Due to the non-functioning of the DRT, the Borrowers filed another writ petition before the Kerala High Court, challenging the Notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and requesting the Bank to accept deferred payments. The High Court granted the Borrowers the opportunity to make deferred payments to the Bank within a period of 12 months. Subsequently, the Bank appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that since an equally effective remedy was available, the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution should not have been invoked.

The present appeal was filed before the Apex court by the Bank against the order of the High Court arguing that since an equally effective remedy was available, the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could not have been invoked.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in consideration of the aforesaid facts, observed that:

Although DRT was not functional at the time of filing the writ petitions by the Borrowers, it became functional from March 2022 and matters should have been relegated to the Tribunal by the High Court. When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. More circumspection is required in a financial transaction, particularly when one of the parties would not come within the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution. This rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, convenience, and discretion.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the High Court has erred in ignoring the existence of alternate remedies under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and wrongly exercised its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to resolve commercial disputes between a lender and a borrower.

Stamping out Uncertainty: Delhi High Court's Ruling on Appointment of Arbitrators Vis-À-Vis Unstamped Arbitration Agreements

IN THE MATTER OF: Splendor Landbase Ltd. Vs. Aparna Ashram Society & Anr.

(Pronounced by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 22.08.2023 in the ARB. P. 366 of 2021)

Facts:

  1. The Judgement has been passed in a batch of Petitions filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 [‘A&C Act’] seeking appointment of an Arbitrator admittedly under unstamped / deficiently stamped arbitration agreements. The Delhi High Court ruling lays out the interplay between the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [‘Stamp Act’] and the A&C Act in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.N. Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. Vs. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. (2023) 7 SCC 1.
  2. A major impediment dealt by the present case revolves around the issue as to whether an unstamped or insufficiently stamped contract / arbitration agreement, that ought to be mandatorily stamped under the Stamp Act, be impounded by the court if such a document is produced in evidence and the procedure thereof.
  3. The judgement also elucidates upon practical impediments faced by practitioners and parties alike, i.e., in a situation where an instrument is executed in one state and the document is presented in a proceeding under Section 11 of the A&C Act in another state, the local stamp laws of which state would be applicable on the instrument.

Issues before the Court:

  • Whether it is incumbent on the petitioner to file the original of the duly stamped arbitration agreement/contract or a 'true copy' filed thereof would suffice?
  • Whether it is permissible for the petitioner to pay the deficient stamp duty with penalty or whether it is mandatory for the court to send the concerned agreement/contract to the Collector for adjudication of proper stamp and penalty payable thereon?
  • Whether the adjudication by the Collector under Section 40 of the Stamp Act can be made time bound?
  • Whether the stamping of arbitration agreement/contract must conform to the local laws/stamping rate(s) prescribed at the place where the arbitration agreement/contract was executed and/or whether the same are required to conform to the relevant prescription at the place where the petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed?

Court Observation and Findings:

  1. If the agreement is not properly / deficiently stamped, the court is mandated to impound the instrument in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in N.N. Global (supra).
  1. The Petitioner has to file the original instrument if the petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act is filed on the basis of unstamped/insufficiently stamped agreement. This is not a requirement when the agreement is duly stamped.
  1. The court, while considering a petition seeking appointment of an arbitrator, basis an unstamped/deficiently stamped arbitration agreement has the following two options:

(i) To send the impounded agreement to the Collector of Stamps for ensuring payment of deficit stamp duty with penalty. Thereafter, the instrument shall be admissible in evidence and it would be open for the court to act on that basis in the proceeding under Section 11 of the A&C Act. The court can also direct the Collector to complete the process in a time- bound manner.

(ii) Where the stamp duty payable is not in dispute, the court can direct the parties to deposit the requisite stamp duty along with penalty in the court itself. Thereafter, an authenticated copy of such instrument be sent to the Collector along with the amount so collected. If the Collector is aggrieved by the decision of the court as regards the duty and/or penalty payable, it would be open for the Collector to move the concerned Appellate Court under Section 61 of the Stamp Act.

  1. Regarding an instrument executed in one state but sought to be relied / acted upon and received in another state, the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court in the case of New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal [AIR 1963 SC 1307] must be adhered to. According to the principles established in the aforementioned case, such an instrument should be stamped in accordance with the laws of the first state, and there is no need for further stamping in accordance with the laws of the second state if the stamp duty rates in the second state are same or lower than those in the first state. However, if the stamp duty rates in the second state are higher, the instrument will only require additional stamping for the excess amount based on the rates applicable in the second state.

CONCLUSION

The captioned judgment passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court answers a lot of questions which arose in the aftermath of the N.N. Global (supra) and proves to be a guiding beacon going forward in cases of appointment of an arbitrator under an unstamped / deficiently stamped arbitration agreement.

Decoding the meaning of “Commercial purpose” in Consumer Protection Act

CASE ANALYSIS: Rohit Chaudhary & Another vs. M/S Vipul Limited, (2023 SCC Online SC 1131)

Decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 06.09.2023

Factual Matrix:

  1. The Appellants planned to buy commercial space in the 'Vipul World Commercial' project in Gurugram, Haryana. They agreed to purchase shares from two sellers, paid the agreed amount, and had their names recorded as owners. The Respondents later demanded outstanding payments, which the Appellants paid promptly. The Appellants received a receipt and an allotment letter for 'Vipul Business Park' but were then reassigned a different plot without their consent.
  2. When the Appellants objected to this unilateral change, the Respondents threatened to forfeit their payments and cancel the allotment. The Respondents sent a buyer's agreement to the Appellants, which they signed and returned. However, the Respondents failed to deliver possession of the premises within the agreed period of 24 months.
  3. Aggrieved by the lack of communication and action, the Appellants filed a complaint with the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission in New Delhi. However, the Commission dismissed the complaint applying the commercial purpose test, stating that the Appellants didn't qualify as 'consumers' under Section 2(1)(d) of the Act because they were already engaged in business for their livelihood, and the property in question was not solely for self-employment purposes.

Issue in question:

Whether the Appellants in such case are the ‘Consumers’ and what is the meaning of “Commercial purpose” under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?

 Court’s Observations and Findings:

  1. In the present appeal, Hon’ble Supreme Court clarified that the definition of 'Consumer' under Section 2(1)(d) of the Act excludes individuals who purchase goods or services for resale or for large-scale profit-making activities. However, if a consumer complaint asserts that goods were bought for earning a livelihood, it should not be dismissed outright.
  2. The court emphasized that the decision to proceed with such a complaint should be based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, and there is no fixed formula for determining whether a complainant falls within the definition of a 'consumer' under the Act.
  3. In this case, the Appellants had clearly stated in their complaint that they sought office space for self-employment and to run their business for their livelihood, not for resale or investment. The Court found the National Commission's decision to be erroneous and not in line with the Act's definition of a 'consumer.'
  4. Considering that the dispute dated back to 2006 and that the Appellants had paid over Rs. 51 lakhs to the developer after which also the allotted office space was not delivered as per the agreed timeframe, the Apex Court directed the Respondent developer to refund the amount received from the Appellants with interest calculated at 12% per annum.
  5. This decision aimed to balance the equities and provide justice to the Appellants while considering the appreciated value of the asset, i.e., the office premises intended for sale to the Appellants.
  6. In conclusion, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturned the NCDRC's order, and instructed the Respondent developer to refund the amount along with interest to the Appellants who filed the complaint.

                                                                                      ***

Disclaimer:

For private circulation to the addressee only and not for re-circulation. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/ or publication of this Newsletter is strictly prohibited. This Newsletter is not intended to be an advertisement or solicitation. The contents of this Newsletter are solely meant to inform and is not a substitute for legal advice. Legal advice should be obtained based on the specific circumstances of each case, before relying on the contents of this Newsletter or prior to taking any decision based on the information contained in this Newsletter. ZEUS Law disclaims all responsibility and accepts no liability for the consequences of any person acting, or refraining from acting, on such information. If you have received this Newsletter in error, please notify us immediately by telephone. 

Copyright © 2014 ZEUS Law. All rights reserved. Replication or redistribution of content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of ZEUS Law.


ZEUS Law Associates Signs MOU with CIDC in collaboration with KRIHS and SCA to Boost Korean-Indian Construction Industry Relations

ZEUS Law Associates, a leading law firm specialising in legal consultancy and cross border transactions, proudly announces the signing of a significant Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Construction Industry Development Council (CIDC) in collaboration with Korea Research Institute for Human Settlement (KRIHS), and Saudi Contractors Authority (SCA). This collaboration aims to streamline and support foreign companies seeking to establish partnerships and joint ventures in India's burgeoning construction sector.

The MoU was signed on 11th September 2023 by Sunil Tyagi, Managing Partner & Co-Founder of ZEUS Law Associates and Dr. P. R. Swarup, Director General of CIDC, representing their respective organisations.

Under this partnership, ZEUS will essentially provide legal advisory and consultation services to foreign entities looking to engage with Indian counterparts in the construction industry. The firm's expertise in corporate, commercial and business law and its deep understanding of India's regulatory landscape make it the ideal legal partner for companies seeking to navigate complex legal and regulatory challenges.

ZEUS Law Associates is honoured to work alongside CIDC, KRIHS, and SCA in promoting foreign investments in India's construction sector. This collaboration aligns with ZEUS Law Associates' commitment to supporting international businesses in navigating India's dynamic and ever-evolving legal and regulatory landscape.


Labelling and Packaging for Drugs: Ensuring Safety and Compliance

Labelling and Packaging for Drugs: Ensuring Safety and Compliance

Author: Jayshree Chandra, Senior Partner & Shreya Pandey, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 30th August 2023

INTRODUCTION

In the pharmaceutical field, the significance of proper labelling and packaging cannot be overstated. These aspects are helpful in guaranteeing the safety, efficacy, and responsible use of pharmaceutical products. The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (“Act”), and, the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 (“Rules”) set the standards and guidelines that pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to adhere to, when labelling and packaging drugs.

LABELLING REQUIREMENTS

Part IX of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 plays a central role in outlining regulations for labelling and packaging of drugs. No person is allowed to sell or distribute drugs, without meeting the labelling rules. This guarantees accurate information on labels before sale or distribution (Rule 95). Rule 96 provides a thorough overview of the requisites for drug labelling in India. It mandates that vital information such as the drug's proper name, net content, content of active ingredients, particulars of the manufacturer, batch numbers, manufacturing license numbers, expiry dates, be imprinted or written in indelible ink on both the innermost container label and external coverings. It also provides for additional labelling requirements for certain drug categories such as imported drugs, contraceptives, vaccines and surgical items. In essence, it reinforces accountability within the pharmaceutical industry.

Rule 97 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, delves in labelling regulations for medicines, outlining directives based on their ingredients and intended use. For instance, if a medicine incorporates a substance stipulated in Schedule G, it necessitates affixing the word “Caution” onto its label. Similarly, if it integrates a component enumerated in Schedule H, it necessitates labelling with an "Rx" symbol. Should a medicine's formulation align with Schedule H and subsequently falls within the purview of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, it mandates labelling a distinctive red "NRx" symbol. In the event that the drug comprises a substance specified in Schedule X then it is to be labelled with a red "XRx" symbol and if it contains a substance specified in Schedule H1 then it needs to be labelled with a red "Rx" symbol and a caution. For external medicines, the "FOR EXTERNAL USE ONLY" labelling is required, while veterinary medicines should state "Not for human use; for animal treatment only" and those for food-producing animals must indicate the drug's withdrawal period. Medicines which are prepared for treatment of human ailments, if contain industrial methylated spirit, must state "For External Use only", and strong substances from Schedule X must have a red label. This rule makes sure medicines have the right labels for safety and proper use.

Rule 102 mandates labels for non-sterile surgical ligatures and sutures, indicating their non-sterile status. Rule 103 further stipulates that the label of patent or proprietary medicines must incorporate the manufacturer's name, address, and the true formula or ingredient list, imprinted or written in indelible ink. Rule 104 requires for the indication of "I.P." and recognized abbreviations on the label of the drug to signify adherence to pharmacopoeia standards. Rule 104A prohibits altering inscriptions on drug containers, labels, or wrappers, unless sanctioned by the Licensing Authority.

PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS

Rule 105 covers the packaging requirements for drugs intended for retail sale in India. The rule defines specific pack sizes for various types of drugs, ensuring consistency and proper usage. For instance, tablets/capsules should have pack sizes that either match the number of units (if less than 10) or are multiples of 5 (if above 10). Liquid oral preparations, paediatric oral drops, eye/ear/nasal drops, and eye ointments must adhere to predefined pack sizes. However, certain exceptions exist, including imported formulations, preparations for veterinary use, export, certain specific forms of medicines, hospitals, registered medical practitioners, nursing homes, and physician's samples. Moreover, new drug pack sizes not covered under these regulations are subject to examination and approval by the Licensing Authority. Oxytocin injections must be in single unit blister packs, and Diclofenac injections for human use must be in single unit dose packs as well. Rule 105A provides for the packaging criteria for Schedule X drugs, ensuring their packaging adheres to appropriate quantities while allowing certain exceptions for hospital and dispensary supplies within stipulated boundaries. Furthermore, Rule 106 firmly prohibits drugs from making claims about preventing, or curing the diseases listed in Schedule J. These collective provisions synergize to ensure responsible, transparent, and safe distribution of drugs within the Indian market.

CONCLUSION

The provisions of the Act and the Rules safeguard public health by ensuring accurate information, preventing misleading practices, and promoting safe and informed use of drugs. Manufacturers and stakeholders in the pharmaceutical industry must adhere to these regulations to uphold the highest standards of patient safety and product efficacy.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Ms. Shreya Pandey is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


ZEUS Newsletter August 2023

Highlights:

Corporate Brief

  • Notification dated 03.07.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) on Securities and Exchange Board of India (Ombudsman) (Repeal) Regulations, 2023.
  • Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism) (Amendment) Regulations, 2023 and Circular dated 31.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding the online resolution of disputes in the Indian securities market.
  • Circular dated 05.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding the amendments to guidelines for the preferential issue and institutional placement of units by a listed REIT or InvIT.
  • Circular dated 13.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding disclosures of material events/ information by listed entities under Regulations 30 and 30A of SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015.
  • Circular dated 27.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding mandating Legal Identity Identifier (LEI) for all non-individual Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs).

RERA Brief

  • Circular dated 05.07.2023 issued by Chhattisgarh-RERA regarding the clarification on publicity/ advertisement made by the promoters of CG-RERA registered real estate projects.
  • Public Notice dated 06.07.2023 issued by Kerala-RERA concerning directions and guidelines with respect to the complaints filed under section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016.
  • Office Order dated 19.07.2023 issued by the Bihar-RERA regarding Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the extension of projects beyond the specified period of extension for completion.
  • Notification dated 19.07.2023 issued by Karnataka-RERA regarding the mandatory deposit of money into the RERA project designated bank account borrowed by the promoter through mortgage of the project land and the utilization of the same project development purposes.
  • Circular dated 19.07.2023 issued by the Chhattisgarh-RERA in association with the extension of time for additional disclosure in real estate project registration.
  • Circular dated 19.07.2023 issued by the Chhattisgarh-RERA regarding the clarification issued on the extension of the real estate project registration.
  • Notice dated 25.07.2023 issued by Bihar-RERA regarding real estate agents only to facilitate the sale or purchase of any plot, apartment or building only in RERA-registered projects.
  • Circular dated 27.07.2023 issued by the Chhattisgarh-RERA regarding the submission of quarterly updates (April 2023-June 2023) of the real estate projects on the CG-RERA web portal.

NCLT Brief

  • Whether the appellant is mandatorily required to file an application seeking leave to appeal along with the appeal before the NCLAT who was not a party to the proceedings before the NCLT? 

Litigation Brief

  • “Creditor's power under IBC against personal guarantor"
  • Outstanding payments of a “Sub-Contractor” cannot be deferred in perpetuity by the contractor on the ground of non- payment by the principal employer 

Corporate Brief

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Ombudsman) (Repeal) Regulations, 2023. 

  • SEBI vide its notification dated 03.07.2023 notified the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Ombudsman) (Repeal) Regulations, 2023. Vide the said notification, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Ombudsman) Regulations, 2003 has been repealed.
  • However, the repeal of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Ombudsman) Regulations, 2003 will not affect:
    1. the previous operation of the said regulations or anything done or omitted to be suffered therein;
    2. any right, privilege, obligation, or liability acquired or accrued or incurred under the said regulations;
    3. any penalty or punishment incurred in respect of any contravention or offence committed under the said regulations;
    4. any investigation, legal proceedings, or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty or punishment as aforesaid.

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism) (Amendment) Regulations, 2023. And Circular dated 31.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding the online resolution of disputes in the Indian securities market. 

  • SEBI vide its notification dated 03.07.2023 has introduced a dispute resolution mechanism that includes mediation and/or conciliation and/or arbitration in accordance with specified procedure for disputes arising under the following regulations:
    1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Merchant Bankers) Regulations, 1992,
    2. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Registrars to an Issue  and Share  Transfer Agents) Regulations, 1993,
    3. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Debenture Trustees) Regulations, 1993,
    4. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996,
    5. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of  India  (Custodian)  Regulations,  1996,
    6. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of  India (Credit Rating Agencies) Regulations, 1999,
    7. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999,
    8. Securities and Exchange  Board  of  India  {KYC  (Know  Your  Client)  Registration  Agency} Regulations,  2011,
    9. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of  India  (Alternative  Investment  Funds)  Regulations,  2012,
    10. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Investment Advisers) Regulations, 2013,
    11. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Research  Analysts)  Regulations,  2014,
    12. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of  India  (Infrastructure  Investment Trusts)  Regulations,  2014,
    13. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of    India  (Real  Estate  Investment  Trusts)  Regulations, 2014,
    14. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015,
    15. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of  India  (Foreign  Portfolio  Investors)  Regulations,  2019,
    16. Securities and  Exchange Board  of  India  (Portfolio  Managers)  Regulations,  2020, and
    17. Securities and  Exchange  Board  of  India  (Vault  Managers) Regulations, 2021

The specific amendments carried out to the respective regulations under the said Notification may be referred to at the link below:https://www.sebi.gov.in/legal/regulations/jul-2023/securities-and-exchange-board-of-india-alternative-dispute-resolution-mechanism-amendment-regulations-2023_73454.html

  • SEBI vide its circular dated 31.07.2023 provides for a streamlined process of online resolution of disputes in the Indian securities market in furtherance of the interests of investors and consequent to the gazette notification dated 03.07.2023 of SEBI.
  • Read more at the following web link:

https://www.sebi.gov.in/legal/circulars/jul-2023/online-resolution-of-disputes-in-the-indian-securities-market_74794.html

Circular dated 05.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding amendments to guidelines for the preferential issue and institutional placement of units by a listed REIT or listed InvIT. 

  • Pursuant to feedback received, SEBI issued 2 (two) circulars, both dated 05.07.2023 for amending the guidelines dated 27.11.2019 on REITs and guidelines dated 27.11.2019 on InvITs, which set forth guidelines for the preferential issue and institutional placement of units by listed REITs and listed InvITs, respectively.
  • As per the circular dated 05.07.2023, Clause 2 of Annexure II of SEBI circular dated 27.11.2019 related to guidelines for the preferential issue and institutional placement of units by listed REITs has been modified as follows:
    1. The institutional placement will occur at a price that is no lower than the average high and low closing prices of units from the same class, as quoted on the stock exchange during the two weeks preceding the specified date.
    2. The REIT may offer a discount of not more than five per cent on the price, subject to the approval of unitholders through a resolution.
    3. “Relevant date” for the purpose of clauses related to institutional placement shall be the date of the meeting in which the board of directors of the manager decides to open the issue.
  • It may be noted that similar modifications have been carried out to Clause 2 of Annexure II of SEBI circular dated 27.11.2019 related to guidelines for the preferential issue and institutional placement of units by listed InvIT.

Circular dated 13.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding disclosure of material events/ information by listed entities under Regulations 30 and 30A of SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 (“LODR Regulations”). 

  • SEBI, vide its circular dated 09.09.2015, had specified the details that need to be provided while disclosing events given in Part A of Schedule III of SEBI LODR Regulations, and guidance on when an event/ information can be said to have occurred. In order to bring more transparency and to ensure timely disclosure of material events/ information by listed entities, amendments to the LODR Regulations were deliberated by the Primary Market Advisory Committee (PMAC) of SEBI and pursuant to approval by the Board, amendments to the LODR Regulations were notified.
  • SEBI, vide circular dated 13.07.2023, has introduced four annexures with respect to disclosure requirements under Regulations 30 and 30A (inserted by the aforesaid amendment) of LODR Regulations, as given below:
  1. Annexure I specifies the details that need to be provided while disclosing events given in Part A of Schedule III;
  2. Annexure II specifies the timeline for disclosing events given in Part A of Schedule III;
  3. Annexure III provides guidance on when an event/ information can be said to have occurred; and
  4. Annexure IV provides guidance on the criteria for the determination of the materiality of events/ information.
  • The said circular has come into force from 15.07.2023. 

Circular dated 27.07.2023 issued by SEBI regarding mandating Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) for all non-individual Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs).

  • SEBI, vide its circular dated 27.07.2023, has mandated the requirement of providing LEI details for all non-individual FPIs. Presently, FPIs are required to provide their LEI details in the Common Application Form (CAF), used for registration, KYC and account opening of FPIs on a voluntary basis.
  • As per the said circular, all existing FPIs (including those applying for renewal) that have not already provided their LEIs to their DDPs shall do so within 180 days from the date of issuance of this circular, failing which their account shall be blocked for further purchases until LEI is provided to their DDPs.
  • All fresh registration, subsequent to the issuance of this circular, shall be carried out upon the receipt of the FPIs’ respective LEI details.

Real Estate Brief

Circular dated 05.07.2023 issued by Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (CG-RERA) regarding the clarification on publicity/advertisement made by the promoters of CG-RERA registered real estate projects.

  • The Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (CG RERA) vide its circular no. 84/2023 announced that (i) the promoters of RERA-registered real estate projects are directed to use the term "RERA Registered" instead of "RERA Approved" in all promotional materials; and (ii) since CG RERA Projects are granted registration based on approvals received from other departments, the use of the word "approved" in promotional materials is not permissible.
  • Additionally, the circular mandates the inclusion of the CG RERA project registration number in all publicity materials.

Public Notice dated 06.07.2023 issued by Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA) concerning directions and guidelines with respect to the complaints filed under section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016.

  • To ensure speedy service of notice to respondents, parties to complaints must produce sufficient stamped covers and acknowledgement cards with respondent addresses for serving notices via speed post.
  • Guidelines are provided for clarification on filing complaints under Section 31 of the Act.
  • Associations of allottees can file a single complaint for common amenities, avoiding the need for individual allottees to file separate complaints.

Complaints must clearly specify the violations and the relief sought under the relevant section of the Act, supported by legally authenticated documents and payment receipts for refund or interest claims.

Office Order dated 19.07.2023 issued by the Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority (B-RERA) regarding Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the extension of projects beyond the specified period of extension for completion. 

  • The Authority's SOP for dealing with extension of applications beyond the permissible period includes several steps.
  • Applications would first be checked by the Legal Section to see if there are any pending complaint cases against the project.
  • If no complaint cases are pending, the Compliance Wing verifies whether the obligations are being met by the promoter and reports are being uploaded regularly. The promoter must provide compelling reasons for the delay and show that project progress allows for completion in the near future.
  • If third-party interests exist, the consent of the majority of allottees is required. The Authority examines exceptional circumstances that caused the project's delay.
  • the promoters need to apply for an extension within three months before the registration expires, but at least one month before, to allow the Authority 30 days for processing the application as per memo No. 189 issued on 15/06/2023.
  • The office will verify whether the conditions, application, and prescribed documents under Rule 6 of RERA Rules, 2017, and other provisions are submitted, including a valid project map.
  • If a promoter has applied for revalidation or approval, the Authority may request the competent authority for the same as per the Rules.
  • The Authority will decide on the extension application, considering whether the requested time is reasonable to complete the remaining development work, balancing the interests of the project and allottees.

Notification dated 19.07.2023 issued by Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority for the mandatory deposit of money into the RERA project designated bank account borrowed by the promoter by mortgage of the project land and the utilization of the same project development purposes.

  • As per the said notification dated 19.07.2023, the Karnataka RERA has issued the following directives:
    • promoters of real estate projects must maintain a designated bank account for each project and deposit money collected from allottees for land and construction costs.
    • The Authority observed that some promoters are borrowing money by mortgaging project land and units but not utilizing it for the project's development as required. To address this, Karnataka RERA has issued directions requiring promoters to deposit the entire amount borrowed for the project into the designated account and utilize it only for development purposes.
    • If the project is registered phase-wise, the promoter must report and apportion the borrowed amount for each phase in the quarterly updates.
    • Lenders must disburse loans only to the designated RERA account of the project, and chartered accountants must verify if the borrowed amount is deposited as required. For existing projects where money has been borrowed but not utilized, the unutilized portion must be deposited into the designated RERA account within three months from the notification date.

Circular dated 19.07.2023 issued by the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (CG-RERA) in relation to the extension of time for additional disclosure in real estate project registration.

  • The Authority has issued a circular regarding additional disclosure requirements for promoters/developers in ongoing and new real estate projects registered in RERA.
  • Promoters were required to provide information on the cost of development works and facilities according to the approved layout and promotional material used for brochures and sales.
  • They were also required to furnish a component-wise financial plan of the project in an attached format, along with quarterly updates on the web portal of the authority and as part of new applications for registration or extensions.
  • vide circular dated 19.07.2023, the time period for submitting the information has been extended until 15th September 2023.

Circular 19.07.2023 issued by the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (CG-RERA) with regards to the clarification issued on the extension of the real estate project registration

  • The CG RERA authority vide its circular dated 19.07.2023 allowed project registration extensions upon submission of necessary documents and prescribed fees in case of non-completion of development works within the prescribed period.
  • The Authority issued a clarification stating that the registration extension applies only to complete the infrastructure development work of the project by the promoter and does not affect the possession period mentioned in the private sale contract.
  • The possession period mentioned in the sale agreement between the promoter and the allottee will remain unchanged despite the registration extension, and the promoters are directed to submit "Development Cost Description" information as per circular no. 83/2023. 

Notice dated 25.07.2023 issued by Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding real estate agents only to facilitate the sale or purchase of any plot, apartment or building only in RERA- registered projects. 

  • The authority has noticed that some registered real estate agents are facilitating the sale/purchase of properties in projects not registered with RERA, violating Section 10(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Section 9(1) of the RERA Act states that no real estate agent should facilitate the sale/purchase of properties in unregistered projects without obtaining registration. As per the said notice dated 25.07.2023, the Bihar RERA has issued the following directives:
    1. The authority orders all real estate agents involved in the sale/purchase of properties in registered projects to get themselves registered with RERA.
    2. Violation of Sections 9 and 10 will lead to penal action under Section 62 of the RERA Act.
    3. Prospective buyers are advised to ensure they are not buying properties in projects not registered with RERA.

Circular dated 27.07.2023 issued by the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (CG-RERA) regarding the submission of quarterly updates (April 2023-June 2023) of the real estate projects on the CG-RERA web portal.

  • The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 requires all projects registered in Chhattisgarh RERA to upload quarterly progress on the Authority's web portal.
  • The last date for uploading the quarterly updates for April 2023 to June 2023 was initially set as 31st July 2023 without any late fee.
  • CREDAI Chhattisgarh requested an extension of the deadline, citing busyness due to income tax filing work in July.
  • The new last date for submission of the quarterly update without a late fee is extended to 31st August 2023, one month later than the original deadline of 31st July 2023. Upon the expiration  the new deadline, any quarterly updates submitted upon expiration are subject to the usual late fee.

NCLT Brief

Whether the appellant is mandatorily required to file an application seeking leave to appeal along with the appeal before the NCLAT who was not a party to the proceedings before the NCLT?

A reference was made by the NCLAT, Chennai bench to the NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi to decide the question whether in an appeal filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) by a third party who was not party to the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority, an application seeking leave to prefer the appeal was mandatorily required to be filed and decided before entertaining the Appeal.

Observations and Findings of NCLAT:

  • Appeal can be preferred by any aggrieved person under Section 61 of the Code

Section 61 of the Code specifically confers right to an aggrieved person for filing an appeal against an order of the NCLT before the NCLAT. The Code confers the right to any person who is aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating Authority whether he was party before the Adjudicating Authority or not. Right to appeal is a statutory right and when a statute specifically confers it then it becomes a vested right. It is a principal of law that if a statute states to do a thing in a particular manner then it is to be done in the same manner and not in any other way. An aggrieved person is entitled to prefer an appeal, as and when, an adverse judgment or order is passed and there may not be any reason to ask such person to file an application seeking leave to file appeal.

  • The Code has no statutory provision for filing leave application to prefer an appeal

There are no provisions in the Code, Regulations thereto or in the NCLT or NCLAT Rules which provides for filing of leave to file an appeal therefore such leave to appeal application is uncalled for. It was further observed that even for filing an appeal against an order by the NCLAT before the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Section 62 of the Code, there is no requirement for seeking leave for filing the appeal. Moreover, unless there is a statutory provision mandating filing leave application for filing appeal by a third party asking such party to file a leave application is not in consonance with the provisions contained in Section 61 of the Code.

Conclusion

The Hon’ble NCLAT, Principal Bench held that a third party who was not party to the proceeding before the NCLT is not required to file an application seeking leave to prefer appeal while filing an appeal under Section 61 of the Code.

Case Referred: Trimex Industries Private Limited v Bhuvan Madan, RP of Sathavahana Ispat Ltd. & Anr. Reference (CH) No. 1/2023 in CA(AT)(CH)(Ins) 130/2023

                                                                               Litigation Brief

“Creditor's power under IBC against personal guarantor"

Case analysis: Vineet Saraf vs. Rural Electrification Corporation Limited [decided by the Hon’ble High court of Delhi on July 21, 2023 in 2023 SCC online Del 4291]

Factual matrix:

  • In 2009, the Principal Borrower had availed loan from the Respondent and the Petitioner stood as a personal guarantor to the said loan and a Deed of Personal Guarantee was executed. The said loan was also secured by Ferro Alloys Corporation Limited as a corporate guarantor.
  • The Principal Borrower defaulted in repayment of loan. In 2017, the National Company Law Tribunal initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) against the Principal Borrower under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). In 2019, Sterlite Power Transmission Limited submitted a resolution plan for the Principal Borrower which was approved by the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) as well as the NCLT.
  • The Respondent issued a Demand Notice under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Rules, 2019, invoking the personal guarantee of the Petitioner. The Petitioner in turn filed a writ petition before the High Court, seeking issuance of writ of prohibition to prevent the respondent from approaching NCLT and to quash the Demand Notice. It was argued that the Respondent has assigned the entire debts to the principal borrower, while excluding the personal guarantees under the terms of the Resolution Plan and the Assignment Agreement. Therefore, the Respondent can no longer invoke the guarantee furnished by the Petitioner. Further, the Demand Notice was indicative of the Respondent’s intention to approach NCLT under Section 95 of IBC against the personal guarantor over a ‘non-existent’ debt.
  • The Respondent argued that the discharge or release of the principal debtor does not absolve the surety of his liability. The respondent is only seeking to recover the part of the debt that was left unrecovered after the CIRP of the Principal Borrower was concluded. Lastly, since the personal guarantees were specifically excluded from the Resolution Plan and the said Assignment Agreement, the terms of the Resolution Plan cannot be altered.

Issue concerned:

Whether a writ of prohibition can be issued to prevent a creditor from approaching the NCLT, the Bench opined that when an alternative remedy exists, then the Petitioner must prove conditions upon its own jurisdiction.

Observations made by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi:

  • The bench was of the opinion the respondent has merely issued a demand notice in order to comply with the statutory requirement of Section 95 of IBC. Such an act cannot be termed as arbitrary.
  • An issue as to whether a writ of prohibition can be issued to prevent Respondent from approaching NCLT, the Bench opined that when an alternative remedy exists, then the Petitioner must prove that the proceedings or actions being taken are wholly without jurisdiction and as to why the alternate forum must be deprived of an opportunity to decide upon its own jurisdiction.
  • From this analysis, it may be concluded that “the existence of an alternate remedy does not act as a bar to entertain a petition praying for a writ of prohibition. In cases where an alternate remedy is available to the petitioner, there is a higher threshold that needs to be met, it being of a total and absolute lack of jurisdiction, in order for a writ court to grant relief. The existence of a statutorily prescribed alternate remedy, where a specialized forum is competent to decide upon its own jurisdiction, the burden upon a petitioner is further compounded. In such a scenario, the petitioner needs to convince the court, not merely that the proceedings or actions being taken are wholly without jurisdiction but also why the alternate forum must be deprived of an opportunity to decide upon its own jurisdiction.”
  • The Bench opined that the matter involves interpretation of contracts and contractual private law questions, which cannot be dealt in writ petition. The High Court urged NCLT to examine law on assignment, contract of surety, and the applicability of Hutchens v. Deauville Investments Pvt. Ltd. to Petitioner’s case.
  • The Bench also considered the decision of High Court of Australia passed in Hutchens v. Deauville Investments Pvt. Ltd., (1986) 68 A. L.R. 367, wherein it was observed that an assignment of the underlying principal debt with an exclusion of guarantee, results into the assignor being unable to invoke the guarantee.
  • While observing the aforesaid, the Bench noted that the concerned NCLT must carefully examine the law on assignment, contract of surety, and the applicability of Hutchens v. Deauville Investments Pvt. Ltd., if at all found applicable in the factual scenario of the Petitioner’s case. Dismissing the aforementioned petition.

Outstanding payments of a “Sub-Contractor” cannot be deferred in perpetuity by the contractor on the ground of non-payment by the principal employer

IN THE MATTER OF: Gannon Dunkerley & Co Ltd versus M/s Zillion Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd.

(Pronounced by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 10.08.2023 in the O.M.P. (Comm) 234/2023, I/A 12401/2023)

Facts:

  1. The captioned Petition has been preferred under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (“A&C”) challenging the Arbitral Award dated 23.12.2022 (hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Order”).
  2. The Petitioner herein is referred as a “Contractor” and the Respondent who was otherwise the Claimant in the arbitration proceeding is referred to as a “Sub-Contractor”.
  3. In outline, the Contractor was awarded a contract in respect of a Thermal Power Project in Nasik, Maharashtra by M/s India Bulls Infrastructure Company Ltd. (“Principal Employer/PE”) vide a Letter of Award dated 05.05.2011 (“LoA”). A part of the works was sub-contracted by the Contractor to the Sub-contractor under an MoU dated 02.07.2011 (“MoU”). One of the conditions of the MoU was that the understanding of the contract between the PE and the contractor would be squarely applicable to the Sub-Contractor. Subsequently, LoA dated 26.07.2011 was executed between the Contractor and the Sub-Contractor. Thereafter, the PE, Contractor and the Sub-Contractor executed a Tripartite Agreement dated 06.08.2011.
  4. Subsequently, the Sub-Contractor alleged that his running bills remained unpaid by the Contractor despite fulfilling their contractual obligations. Disputes arose and, consequently, the Parties, vide order dated 27.03.2019, passed in Arb. P. 64/2019, were referred to arbitration by the High Court.
  5. The Arbitral Tribunal (“AT”) passed the Impugned Order granting an award for a sum of Rs. 2,81,98,726.89/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim till realization in the favour of the Sub-Contractor.
  6. Vide the present Petition, the Contractor assailed the Impugned Award on inter alia the grounds that (i) Payment obligations were on “back-to-back” basis meaning thereby that unless the bills raised by the Sub-Contractor were paid by the PE to the Contractor, the Contractor is not liable to pay the sub-contractor; (ii) the Claim was premature as “PE” had not released the outstanding payments of the Contractor and (iii) Bills raised by the Sub-contractor had to be certified by the PE.

Issues before the Court:

  • Whether the Sub-Contractor was entitled to 96% of the amount claimed in the RA Bills-05 that amounted to INR 2,81,98,726.89/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim till realisation?
  • Whether under the given circumstances, the Contractor can be made liable for paying the Sub Contractor without receiving the payment from the PE?
  • Whether the Contractor can withhold the retention money that became due and payable to the Sub- Contractor upon completion of Defect Liability Period?

Court Observation and Findings:

  1. The High Court stated that the AT had displayed a judicial approach by admitting the Sub- Contractor’s claim based on not just mere production of RA Bills but, instead, in the interest of justice, the AT had duly perused Contractor’s own Tax Invoices, wherein, a sum of Rs. 2,10,09,101.60 was claimed as previous balance under the previous bills (to the PE) and other documentary evidence placed on record. Simultaneously, the AT chose to consider Contractor’s invoice as evidence for evaluation of the claims and awarded Rs. 2,79,04,990/-, after adjustment of 5% towards retention money in favour of the Sub-Contractor, instead of the original claim amounting to 8,77,53,598/- (as this amount was not substantiated by Evidence).
  2. Further, the Hon’ble Court duly took note of the fact that no evidence was produced before the AT by the Contractor to substantiate deviation from the “quantum/quality of the work” done by the Sub-Contractor.
  3. The Hon’ble High Court further interpreted Clause 4 of the MoU that dealt with “back to back” obligations and observed that the outstanding RA Bill -05 was not rejected and, therefore, the pendency of the bills for certification by the PE could not be a valid ground to defer payment obligations in “perpetuity”. Therefore, the Hon’ble Court ruled that the impugned award has been rightly granted by considering and relying on the judicial principle of “best evidence” placed on record.
  4. Lastly, in respect of withholding of “retention money”, the Hon’ble High Court observed that in absence of any specific claim made by the Contractor that the Sub-Contractor had not rectified the defects in the given defect liability period, the retention money, which already became due and payable upon completion of the defect liability period, cannot be withheld any further by the Contractor.
  5. Thus, on the above premise the captioned Petition along with the pending applications were dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court.

                                                                                                 ***

Disclaimer:

For private circulation to the addressee only and not for re-circulation. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/ or publication of this Newsletter is strictly prohibited. This Newsletter is not intended to be an advertisement or solicitation. The contents of this Newsletter are solely meant to inform and is not a substitute for legal advice. Legal advice should be obtained based on the specific circumstances of each case, before relying on the contents of this Newsletter or prior to taking any decision based on the information contained in this Newsletter. ZEUS Law disclaims all responsibility and accepts no liability for the consequences of any person acting, or refraining from acting, on such information. If you have received this Newsletter in error, please notify us immediately by telephone.

 

Copyright © 2014 ZEUS Law. All rights reserved. Replication or redistribution of content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of ZEUS Law.


Stamp duty implications on an order sanctioning a scheme of arrangement

STAMP DUTY IMPLICATIONS ON AN ORDER SANCTIONING A SCHEME OF ARRANGEMENT

Author: Sandeep Bhuraria, Senior Partner & Parijat, Senior Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 22nd  August 2023

The jurisprudence behind mergers and demergers in India is regulated by the mechanism envisaged under Chapter XV of the Companies Act, 2013 (“Act”). However, the controversy with respect to levy of stamp duty on an Order duly sanctioning a Composite Scheme of Arrangement (“Scheme”) passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) has been put to rest by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.

AN OVERVIEW OF THE INDIAN STAMP ACT, 1899

  • The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (“ISA”) is adopted as the central legislation to levy stamp duties across India and is enacted for the purpose of consolidating and amending the law relating to stamps.
  • As per Section 3(1) of the ISA, the instruments mentioned in Schedule I are chargeable with duty specified therein, subject to the provisions of ISA. Different states in India have either enacted their own stamp acts or have adopted the ISA, with certain amendments. However, the rate of levy varies for different states.
  1. INSTRUMENT:
  • Section 2(14) of the ISA defines ‘Instrument’ which includes any document by which any right or liability is created, transferred, limited, extended, recorded or extinguished.
  1. CONVEYANCE:
  • Section 2(10) of the ISA defines ‘Conveyance’ to include every instrument, by which, property is transferred inter-vivos and which has not been specifically provided under the Schedule to the ISA.
  • Hence, Conveyance under the ISA is a catch all residuary provision that prescribes that all such instruments which are not specified in the Schedule to the ISA shall fall within its ambit.

A SCHEME IS AN INSTRUMENT OF CONVEYANCE:

  • Interpretation of the definition of ‘Instrument’ and ‘Conveyance’ under the ISA would showcase that the said definition is an inclusive one, which is amenable to liberal interpretation.
  • The usage of the term ‘includes’ in a definition clause is done with the legislative intent to enlarge the interpretation. Thus, the definition of ‘Instrument’ and ‘Conveyance’ under the ISA can be comprehended to not only include the things that are expressly included but also such things as they signify according to their nature and import.
  • A Scheme may include mergers and demergers involving issuance of shares and also transfer of immovable property by which the said property is vested in the transferee company.
  • Section 232(4) of the of the Act prescribes that an Order of the NCLT approving a Scheme leads to transfer of the assets and liabilities of an undertaking of the transferor companies to the transferee company.

CLARITY ON THE LEVY OF STAMP DUTY

  • The Delhi High Court settled the Law in its landmark judgment of Delhi Towers Limited Vs. G.N.C.T. of Delhi wherein it was held that an Order sanctioning a Scheme is an instrument of conveyance and hence, exigible to stamp duty. The Delhi High Court observed that a legislative omission to mention a subject or item in an inclusive definition does not tantamount to legislative exemption from applicability of the statutory provisions.

PRESCRIBED RATE OF LEVY:

  • Interestingly, the Delhi Towers judgment while stating that an Order sanctioning a Scheme is a conveyance did not deliberate on the rate of the levy of stamp duty on such an Order.
  • The controversy involving the aforesaid, has been put to rest by various states viz. Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, etc., who have adopted the provisions of the ISA and have made suitable amendments to include an Order passed by the NCLT sanctioning a Scheme and prescribed the rate of levy in respect thereof. Most of the States Legislatures have prescribed a lower rate of stamp duty where only shares are being issued to the shareholders of the transferor companies. Generally, the rate of such levy ranges between 0.5% to 1% on the aggregate market value of the shares. In cases where immovable property is being transferred in a Scheme, the prescribed stamp duty is considerably higher and ranges between 2% to 5% on the market value of the immovable property.
  • In states that have not amended the definition of conveyance or their respective Schedules, the rate of levy on an Order approving a Scheme is under the heading of ‘Conveyance’.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.) 

“About the Authors: Mr. Sandeep Bhuraria, has been a practicing lawyer for about 30 years and is a Senior Partner at ZEUS Law Associates. He leads the Commercial Litigation and Restructuring division. He is well versed in the intricacies of Indian Commercial, Civil and Insolvency Laws. He regularly advises foreign investors as well as Indian entrepreneurs on their legal strategy with respect to restructuring their businesses in India. Parijat, is a Senior Associate at ZEUS Law Associates and works in the Commercial Litigation and Restructuring vertical.

 

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


Cyber Resilience for Government Entities: A Legal Blueprint

Cyber Resilience for Government Entities: A Legal Blueprint

Authors: Jayshree Chandra, Senior Partner and Anisha Jhawar, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in Live Law on 18th August 2023

The Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), an organ of Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), is the national nodal agency for responding to computer security incidents in India. Recently, guidelines have been issued by CERT-In regarding the security practices to be adopted by the government entities for ensuring a safe and trusted internet (‘Guidelines’).

The Guidelines is to consolidate best practices related to information security practices and procedures that are required to be followed by ministries, departments, secretariats, and offices and entities associated with these government organisations. The purpose is to establish a benchmark for the cyber security measures and the controls, provide procedures to protect their cyber infrastructure from prominent threats, and cover the best practices to be adopted by the government organisations and associated entities in different security domains such as network security, application security, data security, auditing, third party sourcing as well as prevention and response to combat cyber incidents and cyber security incidents.

The list of requirements and measures that the government organisations and agencies have to follow include:

  • Nominating a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) for Information Technology (IT) security.
  • Formulating a cyber security policy as well as a dedicated cyber security functional team, which is separate from IT operations and infrastructure team.
  • Conducting regular internal and external third-party audits of the entire ICT (Information and Communication Technology) infrastructure.
  • Maintaining inventory of authorised hardware and software with the mechanism for automated scanning for unauthorised device and software.
  • Maintaining network and infrastructure security by way of an appropriate network architecture, including the network perimeter, segmenting of the networks with separate VLANs for different functional requirements, using fire walls to create buffer zones between internet and networks, and other mechanisms such as network intrusion detection, web and email filters, etc. so that only the traffic required be exchanged.
  • Blocking access to remote desktop applications and installing appropriate security technologies to protect information or information systems being accessed via such remote access.
  • Logging enabled devices and restricting the custom of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) and unknown devices without due authorization.
  • Incorporating security at each level of software development lifecycle.
  • Enabling log monitoring on a continuous basis with the ability to alert the dedicated team when a security anomaly is detected.
  • Identifying and classifying sensitive data and personal data and applying measures for encrypting such data in transit and at rest.
  • Implementing micro-segmentation for controlled granular access to database applications.
  • Restricting personal external storage media devices for use with the official information systems or assets.
  • Designing a data back-up policy within the organisation with regular and monitored back-ups, tools to prevent, contain and respond to data leaks and breaches, and such back-up be kept in an area physically separate from the server.
  • Ensuring collection and processing of information is with explicit consent and agreement.
  • Thoroughly examining cloud services models and making sure that no server/ storage is inadvertently leaking data due to inappropriate configuration.
  • Appropriately securing hardware such as desktop, printers and other commonly used and shared devices in the network from any unauthorised access, exposure and use of information or data leakages.
  • Installing only the authorised and licensed software for use from trusted repositories.
  • Regularly conducting awareness programmes and educating end users about the security practices to be adopted for dealing with the cyber threats.
  • Ensuring security measures in respect of social media including, limited and restricted access to the official social media accounts, using a dedicated separate e-mail to operate the social media accounts, multi-factor authentication, approval of the appropriate authority before posting of the contents on social media handles, disabling geolocation (GPS) access feature for such accounts, as well as enabling security logs with periodic monitoring and enabling alerts for unrecognized login attempts.
  • Identifying the possible threat vectors and exploitation points, as well as establishing a formal relationship with the external entities such as CERT-In, sectoral CSIRTs and other stakeholders.

The Guidelines have extensive prescription for Third Party access and outsourcing. The organisations are required to ensure signing stringent non-disclosure agreements before sharing of or allowing access of information to any third party / vendor. The contract should document the information security requirements, such as the general policy on information security, procedures to protect organisational assets, restrictions on copying/ disclosure, return of information/ assets in the possession of third party, water-tight termination clauses for event of security incident or security breach, regular monitoring and auditing the contractual responsibilities, as well as arrangements for reporting and investigation into incidents of breaches. The Vendor is required to follow the data protection norms as well as comply with the information security policies, processes and procedures of the organisation and in case of violation, risk the termination of the contract apart from actions under and as per the applicable laws.

The Guidelines propose Defence-in-Depth (D-i-D) approach along with Zero Trust Architecture to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the network and the data. Zero Trust approach is built around eight pillars, i.e. user device, network, infrastructure, application, data, visibility and analytics ad orchestration and automation.

Private businesses relying on the networks, hardware and software services need to be attuned with these guidelines and adopt appropriate measures, systems, design policies for cyber hygiene and resiliency, as well as have a robust framework for safe, trusted and accountable ICT security practices prior to signing of any contractual document and non-disclosure agreements for their engagements with government organisations and agencies.

****


Government Contemplates Extending PLI Scheme to Chemicals and Petrochemicals Industries

Government Contemplates Extending PLI Scheme to Chemicals and Petrochemicals Industries

Author: Sunil Tyagi, Managing Partner & Sangini Tyagi, Senior Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 17th August 2023

In a move to bolster the chemicals and petrochemicals sectors, the Indian government is contemplating an extension of the Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme. The proposed extension aims to provide impetus to these industries, fostering growth, innovation, and competitiveness in the global market. This strategic step comes as part of the government's vision to strengthen the manufacturing landscape and drive economic recovery post the challenges posed by the pandemic.

The PLI scheme is being implemented in various sectors such as electronics, pharmaceuticals, and telecom, propelling India's position as a preferred investment destination. The government now plans to replicate this success in the chemicals and petrochemicals domains, recognizing their significant contributions to the country's economy and the potential for further expansion.

The chemicals and petrochemicals industries are vital cogs in India's economic machinery, with a broad spectrum of applications across diverse sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, construction, healthcare, and consumer goods. By incentivizing and encouraging investments in these sectors, the government aims to enhance their manufacturing capabilities, promote innovation, and achieve self-sufficiency in critical chemical products.

Under the proposed extension, eligible companies operating in the chemicals and petrochemicals segments will be offered financial incentives based on their incremental sales revenue and investments in new technologies and research and development. These incentives are designed to boost production capacities, encourage the adoption of cutting-edge technologies, and attract both domestic and foreign investments.

The scheme is set to encourage indigenous production, reduce import dependence, and promote the 'Make in India' initiative in the chemicals and petrochemicals sectors. By reducing reliance on imports and promoting domestic production, the country can strengthen its position in the global supply chain and achieve long-term economic stability.

Furthermore, the extension of the PLI scheme is expected to create numerous employment opportunities, contributing to India's goal of inclusive and sustainable growth. The growth of these sectors will not only lead to direct job creation but also foster ancillary industries, thus generating a multiplier effect on the overall economy.

In devising the PLI scheme in the chemicals and petrochemicals sectors and for ensuring effective implementation of the same, the government is in process to work closely in collaboration with industry stakeholders, associations, and experts. It will lead to addressing sector-specific challenges, identifying priority areas, and aligning incentives with the broader goals of economic development and sustainability.

By encouraging investments in green technologies and sustainable practices, the government aims to enhance the environmental performance of the industries. This emphasis on sustainable growth will align with India's commitment to reducing carbon emissions and mitigating the impact of climate change.

The potential extension of the PLI scheme to the chemicals and petrochemicals sectors marks a significant step in transforming India's manufacturing landscape. This forward-looking approach by the government is set to boost domestic production, promote innovation, and create a favourable business environment for both local and international investors. Through strategic collaboration between the government, industry, and various stakeholders, India is poised to fortify its position as a global leader in the chemicals and petrochemicals industries, contributing to the nation's overall economic prosperity.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Mr. Sunil Tyagi, has been a practicing lawyer for over 30 years and is the Managing Partner and Co-founder of ZEUS Law Associates. He leads the Real-Estate & Infrastructure, Corporate & Commercial Law and Compliance divisions. He is well versed in the intricacies of Indian Civil Law, Business and Commercial Law and regularly advises foreign investors as well as Indian entrepreneurs on their business and legal strategy with respect to investment in India.

Sangini Tyagi, is a Senior Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate & Commercial and Infrastructure & Real Estate practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s distinct practice areas include Corporate & Commercial Law, Real Estate & Infrastructure, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


'Advance Medical Directive’ Or ‘Living Will’- Decoded

Advance Medical Directive’ Or ‘Living Will’- Decoded

Author:  Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner and Mona Dewan, Managing Associate, ZEUS Law Associates

Published in Live Law on 09th August 2023

The unpredictability of life during the COVID 19 pandemic that affected almost all countries around the world, reinforced the requirement and created an awareness among people about the importance of succession planning and writing their Wills well in time. A Will is a document whereby a testator devises the bequest plan of his estate which comes in effect upon the demise of the testator. In contrast, an advance medical directive commonly known as ‘Living Will’, which has gained ground throughout the world, comes into effect during the lifetime of the person executing it.

Advance medical directive essentially are the written legal instructions regarding the preferences for medical treatment if one is unable to make decisions for himself in case, he becomes incapacitated. An Advance medical directive spells out the medical treatments one would or would not want to be used to keep himself alive.

In India, there has been lot of discussion on advance medical directives post the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter “Common Cause v. Union of India” [(2018) 5 SCC 1] wherein the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for executing advance medical directive. In this matter, the constitution bench comprising of the then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, Justice A. M. Khanwilkar, Justice A. K. Sikri, CJI Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud and Justice Ashok Bhushan, by way of declaration recognized the person’s right to make an advance directive about the course of his or her medical treatment including the removal of life support if such a situation arises.

Justice Misra and Justice Khanwilkar observed that where a patient has already made a valid advance directive which is free from reasonable doubt and specifying that he/ she doesn’t wish to be treated, then such directive has to be given effect to. Right to life and liberty as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution is meaningless unless it encompasses within its sphere individual dignity.

Justice Sikri in his concurring view observed that “The possibility of misuse could not be held to be a valid ground for rejecting advance directive, as opined by Law Commission of India as well in its 196th and 241st Report. Instead, attempt could be made to provide safeguards for exercise of such advance directive”.

In this matter, the Supreme Court spelt out the safeguards in respect of advance medical directives and issued guidelines and directions regarding who can execute the advance medical directive and how, what should an advance medical directive contain, how should an advance medical directive be recorded and preserved and what should be the course of action if the permission to withdraw medical treatment is refused by the medical board.  An advance medical directive can be executed only by an adult who is of a sound and healthy state of mind and in a position to communicate, relate and comprehend the purpose and consequences of executing the document. It should be voluntarily executed, without any coercion, inducement or compulsion and after having full knowledge or information and should have characteristics of an informed consent given without any undue influence or constraint.

However, the complexity of the procedure laid down and difficulties faced by a large number of doctors in implementing the directions laid down by the Supreme Court led to filing of an application by Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine seeking clarifications on the 2018 Supreme Court judgment. The Supreme Court vide its clarificatory order dated 24th January 2023, modified the guidelines for making an advance medical directive and the process of removal of (or withholding) life support from terminally ill patients.

As per the clarificatory order, an advance medical directive document should be in writing and signed by the executor/ executrix in the presence of two attesting witnesses, preferably independent, and attested before a notary or Gazetted Officer. The witnesses and the notary or Gazetted Officer have to record their satisfaction that the document has been executed voluntarily and without any coercion, inducement or compulsion and with full understanding of all the relevant information and consequences.

Further, it must expressly state the decision about the situations in which withholding or discontinuing medical treatment may be used. The decision of the executor/ executrix should be stated clearly and unambiguously in precise language. Under the advance medical directive, the executor/ executrix should make it clear that they are aware of the implications of carrying out the document. Further, an advance medical directive should specify the name of a guardian(s) or close relative(s) (“Nominee(s)”), who will be authorized to give consent to refuse or withdraw medical treatment in a manner consistent with the advance directive in the event of the executor becoming incapable of taking decision at the relevant time. The executor’s right to revoke the authorization at any time must also be expressly mentioned in the advance directive. The most recent duly executed advance directive will be regarded as the last statement of the patient's desires and will be implemented if there are multiple valid advance directives that have not all been cancelled.

The executor/ executrix should inform and hand over a copy of the advance directive to the Nominee(s) named as decision makers in advance directive as well as to the family physician, if any. A copy of the same is also required to be handed over to the custodian (competent officer of the local Government or Municipal Corporation or the Municipality or Panchayat, as the case may be). The executor/ executrix may also choose to incorporate their advance directive as a part of the digital health records, if any.

The treating physician, when made aware of advance directive of a terminally ill patient with no hope of recovery, is to ascertain its genuineness and authenticity with reference to the digital records of the executor/ executrix, or from the custodian. The treating physician after being satisfied that the directive needs to be acted upon, is required to inform the Nominee(s) about the nature of illness, the availability of medical care and consequences of alternative forms of treatment and the consequences of remaining untreated. He also needs to ensure that such Nominee(s) understand the content of advance directive, the options available and have arrived at a firm view that withdrawal or refusal of medical treatment is the best choice, after considering all options.

The hospital is required to constitute the Primary Medical Board comprising of the treating physician and at least two subject experts of the concerned specialty. This board is required to give its preliminary opinion within time prescribed, certifying whether to proceed with the instructions of the advance directive. Thereafter, the hospital is also required to constitute a secondary medical board comprising of a registered medical practitioner nominated by the chief medical officer of the district and at least two other subject experts in the concerned specialty and the board is required give its decision. The secondary medical board is also required to ascertain whether the executor is capable of communicating and understanding the consequences of their advance directive and if not seek consent from the Nominee(s). In cases where the primary medical board takes a decision not to follow an advance directive, the Nominee(s) can also request the hospital to refer the case to the secondary medical board for consideration and for passing appropriate directions on the advance directive.

The hospital has to convey the decision of the primary and secondary medical boards and the consent of the Nominee(s) to the judicial magistrate of first class before giving effect to the decision to withdraw the medical treatment administered to the executor/ executrix.

The treating doctor/ Nominee(s) or the hospital staff have the option to file a writ petition at the jurisdictional high court if permission to withdraw treatment is denied by the secondary medical board.

The Supreme Court in its order also modified the process to be followed in cases where the patient is terminally ill and undergoing prolonged treatment for his ailment which is incurable and no hope of being cured but does not have an advance medical directive.

The framework prescribed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for making and effectuating an advance directive is a welcome step. However, it must be remembered that this framework is only an enabling mechanism and the possibility of misuse of advance directive cannot be ruled out. Life is precious. Therefore, it is important that the executor/ executrix while writing their advance directive carefully weigh all options and deliberate each aspect and decisions about future care and medical treatment as they would be empowering someone to take the decisions forward.

****


Transfer of Property in favour of family members- Stamp Duty Reduction in Uttar Pradesh

Transfer of Property in favour of family members- Stamp Duty Reduction in Uttar Pradesh

Author: Sunil Tyagi, Managing Partner and Sangini Tyagi, Senior Associate, ZEUS Law Associates

Published in https://www.moneycontrol.com/ on 08th August 2023

In a significant move aimed at promoting intra-family property transfers, the Uttar Pradesh government had on 18th June, 2022 taken a progressive step by fixing the maximum limit of the stamp duty chargeable on gift deed to INR 5,000/-. However, this reduction was for a period for 6 months commencing from 18th June, 2022. The Uttar Pradesh government vide its notification dated 3rd August,2023 has again revived and extended the stamp duty reduction until further orders ("said notification”). This article highlights the important aspects in respect of the said stamp duty exemption.

  • What is the scope of reduction on stamp duty?

As per the said notification the reduction of the stamp duty is applicable for transfer of immovable property in favour of family members being father, mother, husband, wife, son, daughter, daughter-in-law (wife of son), son-in-law (husband of daughter), real brother (his wife in case of death of real brother), real sister and son/ daughter of son/ dauhter.

  • What is the difference between the stamp duty chargeable earlier and applicable stamp duty now?

If the reduction is not applicable, the stamp duty chargeable in Uttar Pradesh on transfer of a property in family members or outside blood relation attracted a stamp duty of 7% of the value of the property mentioned in the transfer instrument or 7% of the circle rate of such immovable property, whichever is higher. However, the same has was reduced vide above notification to INR 5,000/- which is chargeable as stamp duty for transfer of immovable property by an individual in favour of his/ her family members.

  • Is this reduction applicable on all types of property?
  1. The said notification specifically provides that the reduction of stamp duty is applicable on gift of residential and agricultural properties.
  2. Further the said notification pertains exclusively to the gift of property between real individuals. It does not apply to gifts involving fictitious persons such as Firms, Companies, Trusts, and Institutions, whether they are the donor or recipient of the gift.
  3. A restriction has been imposed in case the property is received through a Gift Deed and subsequently gifted by the recipient within five years from the date of registration, then such gift of the property will not be eligible for coverage under the said notification.
  • What would be the effect of this reduction?

This reduction is likely to promote a sense of security and trust within families, as members will have the opportunity to acquire property from their loved ones without the additional financial strain of stamp duty. This is particularly important for families with limited financial resources, as it enables them to secure their future without unnecessary financial hurdles.

Additionally, such an reduction would facilitate the process of restructuring and distributing immovable properties through family settlements easier and less complex since the families would not be required to transfer the properties through a WILL which is a preferred mode for transferring immovable properties to the children in order to avoid stamp duty implications. However, this approach often results in future complications as WILL(s) are open to challenge in court and often leads to ugly family disputes. Pursuant to the said reduction, property may be transferred by between family members without incurring heavy stamp duty and such transfer shall ensure a clear transfer of title.

  • Is the reduction applicable on registration charges and any other charges also as are required for the transfer of property?

There is reduction in stamp duty for transfer of immovable property in favour of family members, the registration fee of 1% will still be applicable based on the consideration or value calculated for stamp duty purposes, whichever is higher. Moreover, for certain areas like NOIDA, permission must be obtained, and applicable transfer charges would be required to be paid to the relevant authority, such as the NOIDA Authority, prior to the transfer of subject property.

The Uttar Pradesh government's decision to waive stamp duty on property transfers to family members is a commendable initiative that demonstrates a progressive approach towards supporting families and the real estate sector. By easing the financial burden and encouraging intergenerational property transfers, this policy is poised to strengthen family bonds and contribute positively to the state's economic growth. As the policy takes effect, it is expected to generate widespread interest among property owners in the state, encouraging them to explore the possibilities of intra-family property transfers. Overall, this move marks a significant stride in the direction of enhancing ease of property transfers and fostering a conducive environment for the real estate sector in Uttar Pradesh.

***


Draft Green Credit Programme Rules, 2023: Decoded

Draft Green Credit Programme Rules, 2023: Decoded

Author: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner & Nikita Chhabra, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 26th July 2023

In a world grappling with environmental degradation and climate change, the need for sustainable solutions has become increasingly evident. As part of the global effort to address these challenges, the draft Green Credit Programme Implementation Rules, 2023 have been proposed by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on 26th June, 2023, exercising the powers conferred under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

This groundbreaking initiative proposed to be launched aims to encourage and contribute to the ‘LiFE’- ‘Lifestyle for Environment’, a grassroot movement introduced by the Government of India to propagate the vision of healthy and sustainable way of living based on values of conservation and mindful utilization of resources. The proposed Green Credit Programme (“GCP”) is aimed at creating a market based mechanism to incentivize and encourage sectors and entities, ranging from small-scaled stakeholders to those being developed at the level of urban and rural local bodies, private sectors, industries and organisations etc. to meet their existing obligations arising from various legal frameworks by undertaking environment positive actions which are able to converge with activities relevant for generating or buying green credits. The green credits issued can be further traded with stakeholders unable to adhere to or achieve the emission targets set by the government.

Under GCP, the Government of India proposes to set up a domestic voluntary market mechanism with a platform where the stakeholders could buy and sell the green credits amongst themselves. Implementation mechanism of GCP follows a phased approach, in the initial phase for designing and piloting the GCP, two or three activities from each sector such as tree plantation, water conservation, sustainable agriculture, waste management, air pollution, mangrove conservation and restoration, ecomark labeling, sustainable building and infrastructure will be identified with more activities to be added in subsequent phases. Thresholds and benchmarks will be mentioned for each environment positive action for issuance of green credits which would also be aligned to the obligations under other laws.

The governance of GCP is proposed to vest with the Steering Committee comprising of representatives from the concerned ministries or departments, domain experts, industry associations and other relevant stakeholders. The Steering Committee will have the power primarily to grant approvals, make recommendations to the Central Government, and review and monitor the implementation of GCP.

Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education shall act as the Administrator of GCP and will be responsible for the implementation including the management, monitoring, and operation of GCP. The Administrator will also be responsible for establishing and maintaining a Green Credit Registry in form of a standardized electronic database containing, inter-alia, common data elements relevant to the issuance, holding, transfer and acquisition of the green credits. The Green Credit Registry shall be responsible for registering an entity, ensuring the accounting of issuance, maintaining records of all transactions, complying with the directions of Steering Committee etc.

For incentivizing sustainable development and environment protection China has undertaken similar initiatives under the Green Credit Guidelines, which encourage banks to provide green credits to support economy to grow in a low-carbon, environment friendly model by assessing environment and social risks. Green credits are available to clients who intend to reduce pollution emission and promote energy efficiency. Stakeholders undertaking environment sustainable practices can also generate funds through green bonds, green loans, green IPO etc. USA, Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein, Korea and several other countries have adopted emission trading as an approach for protecting the environment and reducing pollution. Emission trading programs comprise of two components, firstly a cap (limit) on pollution and secondly, tradable allowances which can be exchanged in the market.

For GCP to be successful, concerns such as greenwashing (wherein companies falsely market their green credentials for example, making misleading statements about the environment benefits of its services or products), difficulty in establishing the parity between different environment positive actions, retiring of green credits and its accounting, ensuring sustenance of environment friendly activities against which green credits are granted, reporting, verification, monitoring and other challenges need to be addressed. Transparency and clarity in the functioning of the green credit trading market also need to be maintained.

The GCP once notified will be a significant step towards promoting environmental conservation and sustainability through recognizing and incentivizing not only the private sector actions but also, individual and community efforts and could be one of the major accelerators for India's aim to become net zero by the year 2070.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Ms. Nikita Chhabra is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


ZEUS Law Associates Triumphs with Real Estate & Business Excellence Award 2023

ZEUS Law Associates, has been awarded as the No.1 law firm in 2023 under the category of Real Estate & Infrastructure, Dispute Resolution, and Restructuring & Revival. This prestigious recognition was conferred upon ZEUS Law Associates during the Real Estate & Business Excellence Awards, hosted by Adsync and media partnered by Zee Business. The award was received by Prerna Kohli (Founding Senior Partner & Mediator), Jayshree Navin Chandra (Senior Partner) and Santosh Singh (Partner).

ZEUS Law Associates has a proven track record of successfully handling complex legal and transactional matters in the real estate industry, resolving disputes with utmost precision, and offering strategic solutions for restructuring and revival of businesses. With a client-centric approach and a keen understanding of the ever-evolving legal landscape,
the firm has earned a stellar reputation and trust of clients across the nation.

The Real Estate & Business Excellence Awards, hosted by Adsync and media partnered by Zee Business, serve as a platform to acknowledge the most deserving entities that have significantly contributed to the growth and development of the real estate and business sectors. The recognition by such esteemed organisations reaffirms ZEUS Law Associates' tanding as an industry leader and exemplifies the firm's unwavering commitment to excellence.


Zeus News Alert- July, 2023

KYC Updation in Share Folios

KYC Updation in Share Folios

Still holding shares in physical form? The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI” or “Board”) has been committed to introduce a streamlined procedure to update the basic identification and bank details associated with shares held in physical mode and to dematerialize them for further dealing. Recently, in March 2023, SEBI has introduced an elaborated procedure to undertake the process of updating ‘Know Your Customer’ (“KYC”) details in the share folios which do not have such details updated. Not only this, for strengthening the transparency and safety in the securities market, updating basic KYC details associated with the folio numbers of the holders of shares has now been made mandatory by the Board in order to prevent share duplication or investor impersonation. Investors can now undertake share dematerialization and KYC updation of their folios by raising Investor Service Requests (“ISR”) with the Registrar and Transfer Agents (“RTAs”) of the respective companies.

There are certain share folios in physical mode in which the bank details of the investor are not updated due to which such investors are unable to receive and enjoy all the benefits related to such share investments. The shareholdings of such investors have been transferred to the Investor Education and Protection Fund (“IEPF”) due to lack of communication with such investors for more than seven years because of the unavailability of their basic KYC details.

In March 2023, SEBI rolled out a notification which enumerates the procedure to update the following 5 (five) mandatory KYC details associated with folio numbers of the shares held by investors:

  1. Aadhar Number
  2. Permanent Account Number
  3. Mobile Number
  4. E-mail Id
  5. Bank Details and Specimen signature of the holder

The investors must ensure that the above-mentioned KYC details must be updated in all the folios held by them in physical or in demat form. The folios in which the above-mentioned details will not be updated by 1st October 2023 shall be decalred as ‘frozen’ by the concerned RTA.

From 1st April 2024, any payment for dividend, interest or redemption payment for all the folios will be received only through online mode. The shareholders are advised to update their KYC details in the records of RTA at the earliest to prevent freezing of the folios held by them.

In case the folios continue to remain frozen as on 31st December, 2025, then they shall be referred by the RTA / listed company to the administering authority under the Benami Transactions (Prohibitions) Act, 1988 and/or Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

A clear and detailed process has been devised by the Board to prevent any loopholes or ambiguities that existed in the earlier notifications rolled out in 2021, in this regard. The investors who want to update the names of the nominees, or opt out of the nomination, can also raise a request with the RTA pursuant to this notification rolled out by SEBI.

The investors may proceed to undertake KYC updation for materializing the accumulated earnings (both principal and dividend earnings) in their past share investments and prevent their share folios from getting the status of frozen share folios by the RTA. The underlying procedure introduced by SEBI for KYC updation will help the investors revive their long-lost investments and the benefits attached thereto, which were not being enjoyed by them for a very long time.

****


Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in India: The Paradox

Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in India: The Paradox

Authors: Neetika Bajaj, Managing Associate and Surbhi Bhuraria, Senior Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in Live Law on 23rd July 2023

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Arbitration Act”) is like that scripture that never stops giving. Every time you read it, you discover a new meaning, a new interpretation and a new paradox. Speaking of paradoxes, it is a fact that success of any dispute resolution system largely depends on the effectiveness of the enforcement mechanism provided in it. The Arbitration Act provides that an arbitral award will be enforced “in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (“CPC”) in the same manner as if it were a decree of the Court”.

We all have heard of the adage that "the difficulties of a litigant in India begin when he has obtained a decree"[1]. This statement of the Privy Council, capturing the agony of the decree holders, still holds true even after almost 150 years. Getting a favourable decree from the court is just half the battle won, the real struggle begins when the decree holder approaches the executing court. The Supreme Court has lamented the situation repeatedly and consistently over the years. In 2016, the Supreme Court, while passing the judgment in Satyawati vs. Rajinder Singh and Another[2], expressed its disappointment by remarking that "It is really agonizing to learn that the Appellant - Decree - Holder is unable to enjoy the fruits of her success even today i.e. in 2013 though the Appellant - Plaintiff had finally succeeded in January 1996". Years have passed but the ground reality refuses to change.

In 2021, a three- judge bench of the Supreme Court, in Rahul S. Shah Vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi[3], issued a direction that Executing Courts must dispose of the Execution Proceedings within six months from the date of filing, which may be extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay. In 2022, a two- judge bench of the apex court, reiterated the position. However, it still needs to be seen how much of a difference these decisions would make in practice on an overburdened judiciary.

But the question is why do the decree-holders have to go through so much struggle to execute what has already been granted in their favour after a hard and arduous court battle. The flaw can be attributed to both the procedure and the system. Order XXI of the CPC, which lays down the rules and procedure for the execution of decrees, is a comprehensive collection of 106 Rules (Rules 60- 63 omitted) laying down the mechanism for stay of execution, mode of execution, attachment procedure to fulfil the decree, adjudication of claims and objections, etc. The issues with the mechanism are several and severe. The Order and extensive Rules therein provide too many avenues to the judgment-debtor to escape the liability by filing unnecessary appeals, applications, objections, non-disclosure of assets, etc. It is not just the judgment-debtor who is at fault for prolonging the proceedings, the courts also attribute more importance to the adjudication of the petitions and suits than the execution of the decrees. This is really the irony and the travesty of the system.

Coming to the Arbitration Act, once an arbitral award has been granted in favour of a party, it would have to wait for a period of three (3) months for the enforcement and execution of the award[4]. During this period of three (3) months, which is extendable by 30 days, the award may be challenged in terms of Section 34 of the Act. On achieving the finality, and in the absence of any stay on execution granted by the court under Section 36(3) of the Arbitration Act, the award- holder knocks the doors of the appropriate executing court for executing the award as if it was a decree of the court. In the absence of any procedure laid down under the Arbitration Act itself, for the execution of the arbitral awards, the award-holder has to face the very courts it wanted to avoid by opting for adjudication under an alternate dispute resolution.

While the Arbitration Act provides for a maximum time-limit of 18 months (from the date of completion of pleadings) for completion of proceedings and passing of the award, which can be further extended only by the court on providing reasons for delay, there is no time-limit in getting that award executed and enforced. And there lies the paradox. The intent of the Arbitration Act to provide speedy resolution of the disputes gets completely defeated by the enormous delays caused in executing these awards. The award remains a paper tiger until it gets executed.

In 2021, there were a total of 14,19,298[5] reported execution petitions pending in the lower courts. The figures for high courts of original jurisdictions are no less alarming. As on date, 32,397 execution petitions are pending before the Delhi High Court and 11,229 petitions are pending before the Bombay High Court[6]. In 2022, in the matter of Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.[7], the Supreme Court categorically observed that India cannot aspire to be an international arbitration hub if there is no enforcement of arbitration awards. This was in relation to a 2017 award granting INR 7200 crores in the favour of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation.

An arbitral award without any provision for its speedy disposal is an anathema to the arbitration proceedings. There is a need to not just overhaul the system at the level of legislation but a serious re-think is required on the procedural level too. We can begin by increasing the number of benches for disposal of execution petitions in a time-bound manner as has been the repeated call of the Supreme Court. Thought can also be given to trimming the procedure, as provided in the CPC, specifically, for the execution of the arbitral awards. The Government of India has recently constituted a committee for suggesting reforms to the Arbitration Act. It is absolutely imperative that the committee seriously considers the issue of delay in execution of the arbitral awards to truly bring out the reforms in the arbitration landscape of India.   

This article is written by Neetika Bajaj, Managing Associate and Surbhi Bhuraria, Associate, Zeus Law Associates. Views are personal.

[1] General Manager of the Raj Durbhunga vs. Coomar Ramaput Singh (1871 – 72) 14 MIA 605

[2] (2013) 9 SCC 491

[3] (2021) 6 SCC 418

[4] Section 34(3) of the Act.

[5]https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/business-laws/gavel-pagethe-emerging-jurisprudence-for-quicker-execution-of-decrees/article65321133.ece

[6] https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/index.php

[7] SLP (C) No. 21396/ 2022


ZEUS Newsletter July 2023

Highlights:

Corporate Brief

  • RBI circular on risk management and inter-bank dealing – Non-Deliverable Derivative Contracts.
  • RBI notification on expanding the scope of Trade Receivables Discounting System.
  • RBI notification on rationalization of branch authorization policy for Urban Co-operative Banks.
  • RBI notification on guidelines on Default Loss Guarantee in digital lending.
  • RBI notification for compromise settlement and technical write-offs.
  • RBI circular for review of RBI (Call, Notice and Term Money Markets) Directions, 2021.
  • RBI circular on remittances to International Financial Services Centers under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme.
  • RBI circular on status of MIFOR as significant benchmark.
  • RBI master direction on minimum capital requirements for operational risk.
  • SEBI master circular for Electronic Gold Receipts.
  • SEBI circular on modalities for launching liquidating scheme and for distributing the investments of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) in-specie.
  • SEBI circular on manner of achieving minimum public unit holding for Real Estate Investment Trusts.

RERA Brief

  • Guidelines dated 01/06/2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi regarding registration and extension of registration of projects.
  • Guideline dated 01/06/2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi, regarding opening of mandatory bank accounts for registration of projects.
  • Guidelines dated 01/06/2023, issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi, for real estate agents.
  • Notice dated 08/06/2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority on anti-money laundering, countering the financing of terrorism, and combating proliferation financing for real estate agents.
  • Circular dated 09/06/2023 issued by GOA Real Estate Regulatory Authority, regarding registration of reporting entities (real estate agents) with Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND).
  • Order dated 23/06/2023 issued by Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding registration of real estate agents with Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND).

NCLT Brief

  • Whether the Compulsorily Convertible Debentures (“CCD”) would be treated as equity or as a debt instrument for the purpose of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (“Code”) and whether the amount due and payable from the CCD would fall within the definition of ‘Financial Debt’ as defined under the Code?

Litigation Brief

  • Elusive errors unveiled through long drawn process of reasoning, are not “Errors on the face of it”
  • Case Brief: Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v/s The Competition Commission of India and Ors.
  • WRIT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ARBITRATOR, DECIDING THE ARBITRABILITY OF THE DISPUTE, IS MAINTAINABLE ONLY IN EXCEPTIONAL CASES

 Corporate Brief

 Circular No. 05 dated 06.06.2023 of A.P. (DIR Series) RBI/2023-24/36 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

  • Risk Management And Inter-Bank Dealing – Non-Deliverable Derivative Contracts (NDDCs)

With an aim to develop the onshore market in Indian currency, the RBI has revised the existing definition of the NDDCs and has now permitted the Authorised Dealer Category-I (AD Cat-I) banks operating IFSC Banking Units (IBUs), in respect of the following:

  1. To offer the NDDCs involving Indian currency to resident non-retail users for the purpose of hedging and such transactions to be settled in Indian currency only.
  2. Flexibility of cash settlement in Indian or foreign currency in such transactions between two AD Cat-I banks, and between an AD Cat-I bank and person resident outside India.

Notification number CO.DPSS.POLC.No.S-258/02-01-010/2023-24 dated 07.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

  • Expanding the scope of Trade Receivables Discounting System (TReDS)

To ease constraints faced by the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in converting their trade receivables to liquid funds, the RBI had issued the ‘Guidelines for the TReDS (updated as on 02.07.2018. Based on the experience gained, and as announced in the Statement on Developmental and Regulatory Policies dated 08.02.2023, the RBI has decided to make the following enhancements to the TReDS guidelines;

  1. Facilitate insurance for transactions: Financiers place their bids on the TReDS platforms keeping in view the credit rating of buyers. They are generally not inclined to bid for payables of low rated buyers. To overcome this, insurance facility is now being permitted for TReDS transactions, which would aid financiers to hedge default risks, subject to certain conditions.
  2. Expand the pool of financiers: All entities / institutions to undertake factoring business under the Factoring Regulation Act, 2011 and the rules / regulations made thereunder, are now permitted to participate as financiers in TReDS. This would augment availability of financiers on TReDS platforms.
  • Enable secondary market for Factoring Units (FUs): TReDS platform operators may, at their discretion, enable a secondary market for transfer of discounted / financed FUs within the same TReDS platform.
  1. Settlement of FUs not discounted / financed: To overcome the inconvenience cause to MSME sellers and buyers as well as for better reconciliation, TReDS platform operators shall now be permitted to undertake settlement of all FUs – financed / discounted or otherwise using the National Automated Clearing House (NACH) mechanism used for TReDS.
  2. Display of bids: To make the process more transparent, the platforms may display details of bids placed for an FU to other bidders; name of the bidder shall, however, not be revealed.

Notification Number DOR.CRE.REC.18/07.10.002/ 2023-24 dated 08.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

  • Rationalization of Branch Authorization Policy for Urban Co-operative Banks (UCBs).

In order to rationalize the process of branch opening and to enable the UCBs to tap growth opportunities in the sector, it has been decided to grant general permission for branch expansion in the approved area of operation to financially strong UCBs.

Circular Number DOR.CRE.REC.21/21/07.001/ 2023-24 dated 08.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI):

  • Guidelines on Default Loss Guarantee (DLG) in Digital Lending.

The recommendation pertaining to the FLDG (First Loss Default Guarantee) was under examination with the RBI. Arrangement between the regulated entities and lending service providers or between two regulated entitles involving Default Loss Guarantee (DLG), commonly known as FLDG, has since been examined by the RBI, it has been decided to permit such arrangements subject to the guidelines provide in the said Circular.

Notification Number DOR.STR.REC.20/21.04.048/ 2023-24 dated 08.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI):

  • Compromise Settlement and Technical Write-offs

RBI has issued a comprehensive regulatory framework governing compromise settlements and technical write-offs covering all the regulated entities. The Framework provides for the regulated entities to put in place the board-approved policies in respect of the compromise settlements and technical write-offs.

The Framework also prescribes broad framework for delegation of power, prudential treatment, reporting mechanism, oversight by the board, cooling period, treatment of accounts categorized as fraud and willful defaulter, and other legal provisions to be included by the regulated entities in the said policies.

The Framework defines:

  1. Compromise settlement as referring to negotiated arrangement with the borrower to fully settle the claims of the regulated entities against the borrower in cash, while also sacrificing some amount due from the borrower.
  2. Technical write-off as referring to writing-off (fully or partially) the non-performing assets outstanding at the borrowers’ loan account, but for accounting purpose and without waiver of claims / recovery of the same.

Circular Number RBI/2023-24/38 of A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 06 dated 08.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

  • Reserve Bank of India (Call, Notice and Term Money Markets) Directions, 2021-Review

The RBI vide the said review of the Directions permitted the scheduled commercial banks (excluding small finance banks and payment banks) to set their own limits for borrowing in call and notice money markets and such banks shall put in place internal board approved limited for borrowing within the prudential limits for inter-bank liabilities.

Circular number 06 of A.P. (DIR Series) RBI/2023-24/45 dated 22.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

  • Remittances to International Financial Services Centres (IFSCs) under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme (LRS)

Presently, remittances to IFSCs under LRS can be made only for making investments in securities.  In view of the gazette notification no. SO 2374(E) dated 23.05.2022 issued by the Central Government, the RBI has now directed that the Authorised Persons may facilitate remittances by resident individuals under purpose ‘studies abroad’ as mentioned in Schedule III of Foreign Exchange Management (Current Account Transactions) Rules, 2000 for payment of fees to foreign universities / institutions in IFSC region, for pursing courses which are mentioned in the above gazette notification.

Circular Number RBI/2023-24/46/FMRD.FMSD.03/ 03.07.25/2023-24 dated 23.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

The company administering financial benchmarks, that is Financial Benchmarks India Private Limited (FBIL) has been accorded approval to cease the publication of Mumbai Interbank Forward Outright Rate (MIFOR) after 30.06.2023. Accordingly, the MIFOR administered by FBIL shall cease to be a significant benchmark after 30.06.2023. The updated list of ‘sigificant benchmarks’ administered by FBIl is as follows (effective from 01.07.2023):

  1. Overnight Mumbai Interbank Outright Rate (MIBOR);
  2. USD/INR Reference Rate;
  • Treasury Bill Rates;
  1. Valuation of Government Securities;
  2. Valuation of State Development Loans (SDL); and
  3. Modified Mumbai Interbank Forward Outright Rate (MMIFOR).

Master Direction Number RBI/DOR/2023-24/ 103 DOR.ORG.REC.22/21.06.050/2023-24 dated 26.06.2023 of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI): 

  • Master Direction on Minimum Capital Requirements for Operational Risk

The RBI has issued Master Direction on Minimum Capital Requirements for Operational Risk for all Commercial Banks.

The directions are called “the Reserve Bank of India (Minimum Capital Requirements for Operational Risk) Directions, 2023. The said Directions apply to all Commercial Banks (excluding Local Area Banks, Payments Banks, Regional Rural Banks, and Small Finance Banks).

The said Directions replace the existing approaches with a new standardised approach, i.e. Basel III Standardised Approach. The Directions has been divided into 4 parts – Part A contains provisions which are mandatory, Part B specifies guidelines which the banks are encouraged to comply, Part C contains frequently asked questions and Part D contains illustrations.

The effective date of implementation of these Directions shall be communicated separately by the RBI.

Master Circular Number SEBI/HO/MRD/MRD-Pod-1/P/CIR/2023/82 dated 01.06.2023 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): 

  • Master Circular for Electronic Gold Receipts (EGRs)

SEBI has been issuing various circulars from time to time for specifying the framework for EGRs, its risk management, standard operating guidelines for Vault Managers and Depositories, etc. In order to enable the stakeholders to have access to all the provisions mentioned in these circulars at one place, the provisions of the said circulars are incorporated in this Master Circular for EGRs.

Circular Number SEBI/HO/AFD/PoD-I/P/CIR/2023/098 dated 21.06.2023 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): 

  • Modalities for launching Liquidating Scheme and for distributing the investments of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) in-specie

The said Circular dated 21.06.2023 amends the SEBI (Alternative Investment Funds) Regulations, 2012 to provide flexibility to the AIFs to deal with those investments that are not sold due to lack of liquidity during the winding up process. The Circular presents two primary paths for AIFs in such a case:

  1. Liquidation Scheme, that is selling such investment to a new scheme of the same AIF; and
  2. In-specie Distribution of unliquidated investments of a scheme.

Circular No. CIR/2023/106 dated 27.06.2023 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): 

  • Manner of achieving minimum public unitholding - Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)

To facilitate the achievement of minimum 25% (twenty five percent) public holding for listed REITs, SEBI vide its circular dated 27.06.2023, has provided the following methods:

  1. Issuance of Units to Public through offer document;
  2. Offer of sale of units held by Sponsor(s) / Manager / and their associates / related parties and Sponsor Group to public through offer document;
  • Offer for sale of units held by Sponsor(s) / Manager / and their associates / related parties and Sponsor Group through secondary market;
  1. Right issue to public unitholders;
  2. Bonus issue to public unitholders;
  3. Allotment under Institutional placement;
  • Sale of units held by Sponsor(s) / Manager / and their associates / related parties and Sponsor Group in the open market in ways as specified;
  • Transfer of units held by Sponsor(s) / Manager / and their associates / related parties and Sponsor Group to Exchange Traded Fund managed by a SEBI registered mutual fund, subject to maximum of 5% of the paid-up unit capital of REIT; and
  1. Any other method approved by the SEBI on case-to-case basis.

RERA Brief

Guideline no: RERA/DELHI/Guidelines/2/2023 dated 01/06/2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi regarding registration and extension of registration of projects.

The Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi has issued guidelines for registration of projects and extensions of registration with RERA, namely, “The National Capital Territory of Delhi Real Estate (Regulation & Development) (Registration of Projects and Extension of Registration) Guidelines, 2023”.

The purpose of these guidelines is to define categories of real estate projects that require prior registration with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi. The guidelines also outline the procedures for registration of real estate projects, grant and extension of validity of registration and process to be followed for uploading the details of the registered projects. Additionally, the guidelines cover the process for inclusion of fresh details and prescribe the fees associated with these purposes.

As per the said guidelines, the following projects, developed by the promoter themselves or in collaboration, and intended for sale, in full or in part, anywhere in NCT of Delhi, in both planned or unplanned areas, must be registered with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi:

  1. Where, the area of land proposed for the development of a building or conversion of an existing building into apartments, or the development of plots for residential, commercial, farmhouses, or residential cum industrial purposes, as the case may be, exceeds an area of five hundred square meters;
  2. Where, the number of apartments (whether called block, chamber, tower, dwelling unit, flat, office, showroom, shop, godown, premises, suit, tenement, unit or by any other name, means a separate and self-contained part of any immovable property, including one or more rooms or enclosed spaces, located on one or more floors or any part thereof, in a building or on a plot of land, used or intended to be used for any residential or commercial use such as residence, office, shop, showroom or godown or for carrying on any business, occupation, profession or trade, or for any other type of use ancillary to the purpose specified) proposed to be developed exceed eight in all phases, irrespective of the area of plot;
  3. Any real estate project falling in any of the above categories, in respect of which the promoter had not received a completion certificate before 1/5/2017.

Guideline no: RERA/NCTD/guidelines/1/2023 dated 01/06/2023 issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi regarding mandatory bank accounts for registration of projects.

The Real Estate Regulatory Authority NCT of Delhi, has issued the “The National Capital Territory of Delhi Real Estate (Regulation & Development) (Mandatory Bank Accounts for Registration of Projects) Guidelines, 2023” to define the types and categories of the accounts to be opened by the promoter prior to registration of the project with Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi. The guidelines prescribe procedure regarding the operation of accounts and for utilization of funds collected from the allottees.

The guidelines provide that the following categories of accounts required to be opened by the promoter prior to registration of the project:

  1. Project Master Account (“Master Account”):
  2. Separate bank account in a scheduled bank is to be maintained by the promoter and 100% of the receivables from the buyers (allottees) will be deposited in this account;
  3. This account must be free from any encumbrances, liens, loans, or control of third parties;
  • It must be mentioned in project related documents vis. application form, builder-buyer agreement and other documents and can only be changed with the permission of the Authority.
  1. Project RERA Escrow Account (“RERA Account”):
  2. Separate bank account in a scheduled bank is to be maintained by the promoter and 70% of the amount realized from the buyers is to be deposited to cover the cost of construction and land cost of the project and 70% amount from the Master Account is required to be transferred to this account automatically at the end of each business day.
  3. This account must also be free from any encumbrances, liens, loans, or control of third parties;
  • Funds can be released from this account upon submission of relevant certificates as per provisions of RERA, 2016;
  1. This account is in the nature of reimbursement account for reimbursement of the expenditure incurred and pai on proportionate land cost and construction cost; and
  2. Withdrawals from this account should only cover the project's costs required for the next final quarter and before withdrawing the promoter is required to obtain a certificate from an engineer, architect, and chartered accountant for purpose of certifying that, withdrawal has been in the proportion to the percentage of work completed.
  1. Project Free Account (“Free Account”):
  2. Separate bank account in a scheduled bank is to be maintained by the promoter. It will hold the remaining 30%

of the amount received from the buyers after depositing 70% in the RERA Account. 30% amount from the Master Account is required to be transferred to this account automatically at the end of each business day

  1. The funds in this account can be used for making finance costs, loan repayment/pre-payment, or other project-related business activities.

It's important to note that these accounts and their operations are subject to the specific provisions and regulations of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

Guideline no: RERA/DELHI/Guidelines/3/2023 dated 01/06/2023, issued by Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi for real estate agents.

Real Estate Regulatory Authority, NCT of Delhi has issued guidelines for Real Estate Agents, namely, “The National Capital Territory of Delhi Real Estate (Regulation & Development) (Real Estate Agent) Guidelines, 2023”.

The objective of these guidelines is to establish the procedures for making changes in details of the real estate agent's information after the issuance of the registration certificate. The guidelines also provide a mechanism to re-validate period of registration due to extension of lease of premises or renewal of the registration upon completion of the period of five years from the date of registration. Furthermore, the guidelines specify the fee applicable for these purposes.

Notice No. MahaRERA/Secy/Notice/913/2023 dated 08/06/2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority on anti-money laundering, countering the financing of terrorism, and combating proliferation financing for real estate agents.

The purpose of these guidelines is to provide an overview and summary of the relevant anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing legislations in India. Specifically, it covers the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (referred to as the "PMLA"), the Prevention of Money Laundering (Maintenance of Records) Rules, 2005 (referred to as the "PMLR"), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (referred to as the "UAPA"), and The Weapons of Mass Destruction and their Delivery Systems (Prohibition of Unlawful Activities) Act, 2005 (referred to as the "WMDA").

These guidelines highlight the applicability and implications of these legislations for real estate agents so as to enable compliance of the provisions and obligations as incorporated in the said guidelines.

Circular No. 1/RERA/AML/(Re-agent)/2023/511 dated 09/06/2023 issued by GOA Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding registration of reporting entities (real estate agents) with Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND).

As per the said Circular dated 09/06/2023, the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND) is created under Prevention of Anti Money Laundering Act, 2022 by the Ministry of Finance to receive cash/ suspicious transactions reports, analyze them and to disseminate financial information to regulatory/ intelligence authorities.

This Circular directs all Real Estate Agents registered with RERA having annual turnover of Rupees twenty lakhs and above to register themselves with FIU-IND on top priority latest by 10/6/23.

Order No. 18/RERA/2023/850 dated 23/06/2023 issued by Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding registration of real estate agents with Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU-IND).

In pursuance to the official letter of Additional Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi, dated 05/06/2023. Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority has directed all Real Estate Agents registered with RERA having annual turnover of Rupees twenty lakhs and above to register themselves with FIU-IND on top priority latest by 26/6/23.

NCLT Brief

Whether the Compulsorily Convertible Debentures (“CCD”) would be treated as equity or as a debt instrument for the purpose of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (“Code”) and whether the amount due and payable from the CCD would fall within the definition of ‘Financial Debt’ as defined under the Code?

Brief Facts of the Case

IVRCL Limited (“IVRCL”) won a bid in April 2009 for undertaking construction, operation, and maintenance of a project under ‘National Highway Authority of India’ (“NHAI”). Pursuant thereto, a concession agreement was entered into between the subsidiary of IVRCL, i.e., IVRCL Chengapalli Tollways Limited (“Corporate Debtor”) and NHAI for the execution of the said project. Furthermore, IFCI Bank (“Appellant”) agreed to provide financial assistance to the Corporate Debtor for execution of the project through CCDs issued by the Corporate Debtor.

The Appellant had agreed to subscribe to CCDs amounting to Rs. 12.5 crores vide a ‘Debenture Subscription Agreement’ (“DSA”). The Corporate Debtor, IVRCL and the Appellant entered into a share buy-back agreement dated 14.10.2011, wherein the terms and conditions of the buy-back of aforementioned CCDs subscribed by the Appellant were mentioned. Furthermore, DSA empowered Appellant to sell the CCDs to a third party.

Vide order dated 20.04.2020, the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Branch (“NCLT”) initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) of IVRCL. Pursuant thereto, the Appellant filed a claim with the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor; however, the same was rejected. Subsequently, the Appellant filed an application challenging the rejection of claim before the NCLT and the NCLT upheld the decision of the resolution professional rejecting the claim of the Appellant.

The NCLT held that the CCDs subscribed by the appellant was to be treated as equity and not as debt. The NCLT also held that the CCDs cannot acquire the status of debt on default because interest on CCDs is to be paid by the sponsor, i.e., IVRCL, the holding company of Corporate Debtor and the Corporate Debtor was not under any obligation to pay interest on the borrowing.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (“NCLAT”).

Observation and Decision of NCLAT

The NCLAT held that in the present case, the CCDs had matured before the initiation of CIRP proceedings of the Corporate Debtor. The NCLAT observed that it is evident from the record that the investment was in the form of debentures which would be converted into equity. Furthermore, the terms and conditions of the DSA and the parties intent did not specify anywhere that the instrument would acquire the nature of a financial debt in the occurrence of any event which was evident from the provisions of the Loan Agreement and the Concession Agreement executed between NHAI and the Corporate Debtor, which define equity to include CCDs as part of the Project's equity component.

Thus, the NCLAT held that the CCDs are equity instruments and do not fall within the definition of Financial Debt as defined under Section 5(8) of the Code. Hence, the NCLAT dismissed the appeal.

Case Referred- M/s IFCI Ltd. Vs. Sutanu Sinha (Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 108/2023)

Litigation Brief

Elusive errors unveiled through long drawn process of reasoning, are not “Errors on the face of it”

In the matter of: Arun Dev Upadhyaya v. Integrated Sales Service Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 779

Decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 5 July 2023.

Factual matrix of the case:

  • M.C. Management Consultants Limited (DMC) and Integrated Sales Service Ltd. (Respondent No. 1) entered into a Representation Agreement to provide services on a commission basis. The Agreement states that any disputes between the parties will be governed by the laws of the State of Missouri, USA, and will be resolved through arbitration by a single arbitrator, as outlined in the Agreement.
  • Respondent No. 1 issued a demand for initiating arbitration to Review Petitioner (Arun Dev Upadyaya) who was a director of DMC under Commercial Arbitration Rules of American Arbitration Association seeking damages to the tune of US $ 4.8 million. The Review Petitioner filed Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 application on the same claiming that it could not be compelled to participate in the arbitration as he was not a signatory to the Agreement. An order rejecting the said application was passed by the Tribunal stating that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to decide whether the non-signatory to the Representation Agreement were appropriately named in the arbitration or not.
  • The impugned judgment dated 10.08.2021 titled Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt. Ltd. vs. Integrated Sales Service Ltd. & Anr. wherein the civil appeals filed by the Review Petitioner were dismissed, on the ground that it could not be compelled to participate in the arbitration as it was not a signatory to the Agreement.
  • The Division Bench finally allowed the Arbitration Appeal and held the award to be enforceable against Review Petitioner and GBTL also as the award was a foreign award.
  • These orders were challenged before Hon’ble Supreme Court by the Review Petitioner by way of filing SLP. DMC also filed separate SLPs. In the SLP filed by DMC, the Court granted leave subject to condition that it deposits US $ 2.5 million. The Hon’ble Court vide judgment dated 10.08.2021 dismissed all the appeals. The present Review Petitions have been preferred only by Arun Dev Upadhyaya (Review Petitioner) to review the judgement dated 10.08.2021.

Issue concerned:

  • Whether there is any error apparent on the face of the record so as to enable the superior court to call for the records and quash the order by a writ of certiorari or whether the error, if any, was “a mere error not so apparent on the face of the record”, which can only be corrected by an appeal if an appeal lies at all.

Observations made by Hon’ble Supreme Court:

  • The bench of Justices B R Gavai and Vikram Nath reinforced the ruling by exhaustively reviewing the grounds and the findings returned debunking the claims of the Review Petitioner upholding his disagreement. Further adding to the observation, the Hon’ble court has laid down that the review power with the court is not an appellate flight and is strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order XLVII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

The following observations were made:

“Each and every argument having been considered by this Court in its judgment dated 10.08.2021, the arguments advanced if accepted would result in expressing a different opinion on the points raised and decided, which we are afraid do not fall within the settled contours of Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC relating to error apparent on the face of record. The other grounds of invoking the review power are neither existing nor have been raised in the present petitions.”

  • The Hon’ble Court laid down that “an error on the face of record” strikes instantly and should be glaring errors, defying the long-drawn deliberations on the points where there may conceivably be two different opinions, putting the Review Petitioner into perilous position entrapped by mistake or error.
  • The Hon’ble Court found no merits to entertain the review petition and accordingly dismissed it.

Case Brief: Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v/s The Competition Commission of India and Ors.

Background:

The Delhi High Court has ruled that decisions made by regulators while performing their regulatory duties under their statutory authority are not subject to scrutiny by the Competition Commission of India. The court set aside an investigation initiated by the CCI issued against the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI).

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India filed the current petition, to contest a decision made by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) pursuant to Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002, in which the CCI directed the Director General to investigate into a matter involving the Continuing Professional Education (CPE) programme run by ICAI. The CPE programme enables ICAI members to maintain the necessary professional competence and guarantees that the professional services they provide are of the highest calibre. A Chartered Accountant must spend a specified number of hours over the course of three years in accordance with the programme requirements attending CPE seminars and workshops in order to stay updated on advancements in their field.

Before the commission, an informant provided information under Sec 19(1)(a) of the Competition ACT arguing that the institution should permit its members to earn CPE credits by attending seminars of their choosing and interests, which may be organised by other groups or organisations. The Informant contended that ICAI was abusing its dominant position in the relevant market as per Section 4 of the Act.

This prompted the commission to form a prima facie opinion that by conducting the CPE programme, directly or through its organs, the ICAI was not only creating an entry barrier for other market players but was also imposing an unreasonable restraint. This was also an arbitrary exercise of its powers.

Submissions:

On Behalf of ICAI: ICAI is a statutory body and charged with carrying out regulatory functions under the CA Act. It was submitted that conducting the program for continuing professional education, in furtherance of its statutory functions, lacks the ingredients of any commercial activity and therefore, is outside the sweep of the Competition Act. Further, ICAI is not an “enterprise” within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, since it is not carrying on any economic activity.

On Behalf of CCI and Informant: The present petition was not maintainable because an order under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act was merely an administrative / interdepartmental direction.

  • Issues:

The Delhi High Court recognized two issues in contention-

  1. Whether ICAI is an enterprise within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Competition Act.
  2. If so, is there any abuse of dominant position as per Section 4 of the Act, and can it be scrutinized by the CCI.

Decision:

With respect to the first issue, the Court came to the conclusion that ICAI is an ‘enterprise’ as per the wide definition provided under Section 2(h) as it is a ‘person’ under Section 2(l) and service rendered in field of education by it also falls within ‘service’ under Section 2(u). Further, the present function cannot be termed as a sovereign function of the Government which is specifically excluded from the definition of enterprise. Even though earning revenue is not an objective, it does carry on economic activity.

The court observed that the decision of ICAI to frame the CPE Program for maintenance of professional standards cannot be considered as abuse of its dominant position. ICAI falls within the definition of ‘statutory authority’ under Section 2(w). ICAI’s decision that its members should attend the CPE program is its decision as a regulator and not a service provider.In terms of Section 15(2)(e) of the CA Act, the Council / ICAI has the power and the function to recognize foreign qualification and training for the purposes of enrolment. The discretion to recognize certain foreign qualifications is vested with ICAI. Regulatory powers are not subject to review by the CCI.

The bench further noted that the CCI exercises powers conferred under the Competition Act, which in terms of Section 62 of the Competition Act, is in addition and not in derogation of other statutes.

It was further observed by the court that the scope of examination must be confined to only those areas of economic activities, which have a bearing on the market that engages entities involved in trade and commerce. The bench said that it is unable to accept that the jurisdiction of the CCI extends to compelling a statutory body to outsource functions that it performs in discharge of its statutory duties notwithstanding that the same may fall within the sphere of economic activity. Accordingly, the Delhi High Court quashed the investigation ordered by CCI against the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI).

WRIT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ARBITRATOR, DECIDING THE ARBITRABILITY OF THE DISPUTE, IS MAINTAINABLE ONLY IN EXCEPTIONAL CASES

IN THE MATTER OF: IDFC First Bank Limited v. Hitachi MGRM Net Limited

(pronounced by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 11.07.2023 in W.P(C) 8573 of 2021 [2023/DHC/4698])

Facts:

  1. The Petitioner, IDFC First Bank Limited, and the Respondent, Hitachi MGRM Net Limited, entered into agreements i.e., Strategic Partnership Agreement (“SPA”) and Business Development Agreement (“BDA”), dated 15.05.2017, with the objective to promote each other’s business.
  2. Certain disputes arose between the parties and accordingly the agreements stood terminated. The Petitioner asserted that an amount of Rs. 15 Crores, paid by the Petitioner as advance, was refundable by the Respondent to it. As the Respondent failed to refund the same, the Petitioner invoked arbitration on 28.06.2019.
  3. During the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, the Hon’ble Supreme Court's rendered its decision in Vidya Drolia and Others vs. Durga Trading Corporation[1]. The Petitioner was of the opinion that, in terms of this decision, the disputes which are governed by the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter 'RDB Act, 1993') would not be arbitrable.
  4. Therefore, the Petitioner moved an application, under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) challenging the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal and seeking termination of the mandate of the Tribunal on 23.02.2021. The Ld. Arbitral Tribunal passed the order, dated 31.05.2021, dismissing the application under Section 16 of the Act.
  5. The Petitioner preferred the present writ, against the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, in the light of the decision in Vidya Drolia. The Respondent challenged the maintainability of the present Writ Petition stating that the Petitioner's only remedy, under the Arbitration Act, is to raise a challenge under Section 34 of the Act.

Issues before the Court:

  1. Whether the present writ petition is maintainable and is liable to be entertained?
  2. Whether the arbitral proceedings ought to continue in view of the objection as to the non-arbitrability raised?

Courts Observations and Findings:

  • The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi opined that an order passed under Section 16 of the Act is appealable if the plea raised is held to be maintainable and the arbitral proceedings are terminated. However, if the plea is rejected and the arbitral proceedings continue, no appeal is provided. Therefore, the intention is not to permit an appellate remedy in case the Arbitral Tribunal holds that it has jurisdiction to proceed with the reference. Furthermore, such an order would be liable to be challenged only once the final award is passed by invoking the terms of Section 34 of the Act.
  • The Court placed reliance on the judgement of Deep Industries Ltd. v ONGC Ltd.[2] wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India categorically held that “the drill of Section 16 of the Act was that where a Section 16 application was dismissed, no appeal was provided and the challenge to the Section 16 application being dismissed must await the passing of a final award at which stage it may be raised under Section 34.” The Court further relied upon the judgement of Bhaven Construction v. Executive Engineer Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. and Ors.[3] which reiterated the findings of the above said judgement.
  • The Hon’ble High Court also referred to the matter of Surendra Kumar Singhal & Ors. v. Arun Kumar Bhalotia & Ors[4]., wherein the Supreme Court of India laid down the circumstances in which such petitions ought to be entertained which specially stated that for an “interference under Article 226/227, there have to be exceptional circumstances”
  • Thus, the Court, relying on the case of Tagus Engineering Private Limited & Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors.[5] held that the power of the court, under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, must be used only in exceptional circumstances when the order was patently illegal or perverse on the face of it or the tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to pass such orders.Thus, the present petition was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

[1] (2021) 1 Supreme Court Cases (Civ) 549:2020.

[2] (2020) 15 SCC 706.

[3] (2022) 1 SCC 75.

[4] 279 (2021) DLT 636.

[5] Writ Petition No. 3957/2021.


EXPLAINED: Nutraceuticals & Related Regulations in India

EXPLAINED: Nutraceuticals & Related Regulations in India

Author: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner & Anisha Jhawar, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 12th July 2023

Nutraceuticals are products made from naturally occurring ingredients that are extracted, isolated, and purified from food or non-food sources, which upon consumption in specific amounts, render a certain physiological benefit and maintain good health.

In India, the nutraceuticals are regulated by Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (‘FSSAI’) under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (‘FSS Act’), and regulations thereunder, including: FSS (Health Supplements, Nutraceuticals, Food for Special Dietary Use, Food for Special Medical Purpose, Functional Food and Novel Food) Regulations, 2016 as amended by the first amendment regulations, 2021 (‘Nutraceutical Regulations or said Regulations’), FSS (Organic Foods) Regulations, 2017, FSS (Food Product Standards and Food Additive) Regulations, 2011, FSS (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011, FSS (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, FSS (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Regulation, 2011, and FSS (Contaminants, Toxins and Residues) Regulations, 2011, in addition to the FSS (Import) Regulations, 2017 in case of import of the nutraceuticals.

The Nutraceutical Regulations apply to food items / products / formulations, existing or new, prepared for humans above the age of 2 years, with an aim to promote maintenance of health. The nutraceuticals may contain ingredients formulated, either alone or in combination, or their extracts (processed / unprocessed), in regular or conventional food formats such as liquid or syrup, suspension or powder, granule, tablet or capsule or any other format approved by the FSSAI. Formulations meant for infant nutrition are governed separately under FSS (Foods for Infant Nutrition) Regulations, 2020. Other dosage formats such as sprays can also be included in the list of permitted food formats.

All Food Business Operators (‘FBOs’) engaged in manufacturing, packaging, selling, offering for sale, marketing or otherwise distribution or import of nutraceuticals in India, whether as domestic FBOs or importers, are required to comply with Nutraceutical Regulations in course of such business.

Interestingly, any product offered in a naturally occurring food form do not categorise as nutraceutical and has been excluded from the Nutraceutical Regulations. For example, all vegetables, cereals, legumes, spices, fruits, or any other plants or botanicals, even if the same is minimally processed in juice / cooked form, are not permitted to be sold as nutraceuticals. Similarly, conventional foods or foods for mass consumption which have the ingredients by their natural composition are also not considered as nutraceuticals.

Nutraceutical products are required to contain at least one ingredients / additives specified in Schedule VI (list of ingredients as nutraceuticals) and may contain ingredients specified under Schedule I, II, IV, VII and VIII, with quantity of nutrients added not exceeding the recommended limits / daily allowances prescribed by ICMR. However, FBOs are also permitted to use the ingredients that are standardized or permitted for use in preparation of any other standardized food. Organic foods can also be used as ingredients in the manufacturing of nutraceutical products. FBOs must note that ingredients from animal source need to be used subject to prescriptions under the Nutraceutical Regulations as well as FSS (Food Product Standards and Food Additive) Regulations, 2011. Presently, any ingredient of genetically modified origin is not permitted for safety reasons. Therefore, use of ingredients of genetically modified and nanotechnology can also be included in manufacturing and production of nutraceuticals.

The Regulations also provide that the label on such article is required to specify the purpose, target consumer group, physiological / disease conditions that the nutraceutical product addresses, recommended duration of use, instructions, precautions for the use, in addition to specific labelling requirements.

FBOs are also required to produce data on the scientific rationale for formulation of combination in the nutraceuticals, which may be based on a scientific literature in peer-reviewed journals / publications.

FBOs in business of nutraceuticals may make health benefits related claims such as claims for enhanced function, health maintenance, immunity claims, or ingredients (nutrient or nutritional) claims including claims regarding food for enhanced function and disease risk reduction, having regard to the prescriptions under the Nutraceutical Regulations. However, any sort of claims akin to drugs and claiming to prevent, treat or cure human diseases, or referring to such properties cannot be made by the FBOs for any nutraceutical as they fall under the ambit of Drugs Controller General of India and not FSSAI. Other claims that are not drug claims, or where scientific evidence does not exist, or where a novel ingredient is used/introduced, need prior approval of FSSAI basis sufficient scientific evidence supporting the claims. FSSAI holds power to alter, modify or stop any claims where it deems fit to do so.

The licensing requirements continue to be covered by the FSS (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Regulations, 2011.

Given the competitiveness of the nutraceutical market, the intellectual property considerations are also witnessing a rapid growth with patents as a major protection for the research, development and usage of the nutraceutical products, trademark being source of trust with the consumers, as a defence for unauthorised adoption, determining similarity of marks and distinguishing one company from the other. The copyright also comes in picture owing to the launches of products, marketing and comparative advertising, infringing logos / labels etc. Even though the Courts have held that the test for infringement and passing off for nutraceuticals products is same as the test applicable to the pharmaceutical products, yet the IP rights of nutraceuticals remain of prime focus for the industry players.

Conclusion

The nutraceutical industry has an abundant scope for manufacturing and consumption in India, as there lies a wide customer base, as well as an untapped opportunity for both manufacturers and exporters in India. However, the industry is still in its nascent stage, taking baby steps. There are perhaps certain teething issues which would be eventually resolved with the growth of the industry as well as of the regulatory framework.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Ms. Anisha Jhawar is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.

 


CIRP: Preparation Of A Resolution Plan & Its Approval

CIRP: PREPARATION OF A RESOLUTION PLAN AND ITS APPROVAL

Authors: Sandeep Bhuraria, Senior Partner and Monish Surendran, Senior Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in Live Law on 11th June 2023

The object of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“the Code”) is to provide an institutional framework for resolving debt-ridden companies, partnerships and individuals through a time bound process.

In the case of a company, an application can be filed by a creditor under Section 7 / 9 of the Code or by the company in distress, i.e., corporate debtor, under Section 10 of the Code before the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) of a corporate debtor. Once an application under Section 7, 9 or 10 is admitted, the CIRP proceedings of the corporate debtor is initiated and an Interim Resolution Professional (“IRP”) is appointed by the NCLT for the corporate debtor. The IRP carries out the public announcement and invites creditors of the corporate debtor to file their claims and thereafter, constitutes the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) of the corporate debtor. The CoC then appoints a Resolution Professional (“RP”) in the first CoC Meeting of the Corporate Debtor.

Thereafter, the RP of the corporate debtor invites Prospective Resolution Applicants (“PRAs”) to revive the corporate debtor. The process initially starts from inviting PRAs to file an Expression of Interest (“EOI”) for securing eligibility to present a resolution plan for the corporate debtor and attains finality after an order is passed by the NCLT approving a resolution plan thereby reviving the corporate debtor with a new management. The said process is elaborated upon herein below:

  1. ISSUANCE OF INVITATION FOR SUBMISSION OF EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

1.1    The first step in attempting to revive the corporate debtor is the publishing of the invitation of EOI as per Regulation 36A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (“CIRP Regulations”) thereby inviting eligible PRAs to submit their resolution plans. The invitation for EOI is required to be made in Form G and not later than sixtieth day from the insolvency commencement date in an English newspaper and one vernacular newspaper with wide circulation at the location of the registered office and principal office of the corporate debtor. Form G is also required to be published on the website of the corporate debtor (if any), website of the IBBI, i.e., https://ibbi.gov.in/, and in any other manner as decided by the CoC. The invitation for EOI is required to provide the following:

a.   Where the detailed invitation for EOI can be downloaded or obtained from (as the case may be)

b.     Provide the last date for submission of EOI which shall not be less than 15 days from the date of                issuance of the detailed EOI

1.2    Further, the detailed Invitation for EOI shall provide for:

  1. Criteria for being classified as a PRA which is approved by the CoC in accordance with Section 25(2) of the Code taking into account the complexity and scale of operations of the business of the corporate debtor. The eligibility criteria for becoming a PRA is covered under the commercial wisdom of the CoC and hence, the same cannot be questioned even by the NCLT, which has also been held by the NCLAT in the matter of Kannan Tiruvengandam V/s M.K. Shah Exports Ltd. and Ors.
  1. Ineligibility norms provided under Section 29A of the Code for PRAs.
  1. Basic information about the corporate debtor which may be required by the PRA for submitting an EOI.

1.3    The invitation for EOI cannot request for payment of any fee or any non-refundable deposit for submission of an EOI.

  1. SUBMISSION OF EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

2.1    As per Regulation 36A of the CIRP Regulations, the EOI provided by the eligible PRAs is required to be unconditional and accompanied by the following undertakings:

  1. That the PRA meets the criteria specified by the CoC for submitting a resolution plan along with relevant records evidencing the same;
  2. That the PRA does not suffer from any ineligibility under Section 29A along with relevant records evidencing the same;
  3. That if at any time period during the CIRP proceedings of the corporate debtor, the PRA becomes ineligible then the PRA shall forthwith intimate the RP;
  4. That the information given in the EOI is true and correct and further stating that in case of discovery of any false information, the PRA shall become ineligible and any amount submitted as refundable deposit shall be forfeited. Further, penal action under the Code shall also be attracted;
  5. That the PRA shall maintain confidentiality of the information provided by the RP and the PRA shall not utilise the said information to cause undue gain or undue loss to itself or any other person and shall comply with the requirements under Section 29(2) of the Code. 

2.2    The EOI is required to be submitted within the time period given in the invitation for EOI. Further, as per Regulation 36A(6) of the CIRP Regulations, an EOI received after the time specified in the initiation for EOI is required to be rejected. 

  1. PERUSAL OF EXPRESSION OF INTERESTS AND ISSUANCE OF LIST OF PROSPECTIVE RESOLUTION APPLICANTS

3.1    As per Regulation 36A(8) of the CIRP Regulations, the RP is required to conduct due diligence based on the material on record to establish that the PRA complies with:

  • Provisions of Section 25(2)(h) of the Code which provide the eligibility norms that have been decided by the RP in consultation with the CoC;
  • Provisions of 29A of the Code which specifies disqualifications;
  • Other requirements as specified in the invitation for EOI.

3.2    After perusing the EOIs, as per Regulation 36A(10) of the CIRP Regulations, the RP is required to present a provisional list of PRAs to the CoC and all of the PRAs who submitted EOIs within 10 days of the last date of submission of EOIs. A 5 day window is granted for entertaining any objection to inclusion or exclusion of a PRA from the date of issuance of the provisional list of PRAs.

Within 5 days of the issuance of the provisional list, these provisional PRAs are required to be provided with the Information Memorandum (“IM”), Request for Resolution Plan (“RFRP”) for preparation of a resolution plan and the Evaluation Matrix (“EM”) which showcases the criteria for evaluating the resolution plans as per Resolution 36B of the CIRP Regulations.

3.3    After considering the objections pertaining to inclusion or exclusion of a PRA in the provisional list of PRAs, the RP is required to issue the final list of PRAs who shall be eligible to present a resolution plan for the corporate debtor, as per Regulation 36A(12) of the CIRP Regulations, within 10 days of the last date for receipt of objections. 

  1. DOCUMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED WHILE PREPARING A RESOLUTION PLAN

In terms of Regulation 36B(1) of the CIRP Regulations, an IM, RFRP and an EM is required to be issued to every PRA in the provisional list within 5 days of the date of issuance of the provisional list of PRAs. These documents provide information pertaining to the corporate debtor for preparing a resolution plan for the corporate debtor along with the criteria that would be utilised to evaluate the resolution plan(s) that would be submitted by the PRAs.

  • Information Memorandum

As per Section 29 of the Code, IM is a document prepared by the RP which contains relevant information pertaining to the corporate debtor which is essential for formulating a resolution plan for the corporate debtor. As per Regulation 36 of the CIRP Regulations, the IM is required to provide for:

  1. The assets and liabilities of the corporate debtor including contingent liabilities as on the date of the commencement of the CIRP proceedings of the corporate debtor along with the audited financial statements of the last two years and the provisional financial statements of the current year;
  2. List of creditors along with security interest held by them and their respective claimed amounts and the amounts that have been actually admitted;
  3. Particulars of debt owed to or from the corporate debtor to the related parties of the corporate debtor;
  4. Particulars of members or partners holding at least 1% stake in the corporate debtor;
  5. List of guarantees given by other persons in relation to debt owed by the corporate debtor. Further, specifying guarantors who are a related party;
  6. Details of ongoing litigations and investigations pending against the corporate debtor by the government and statutory authorities;
  7. Details of workers and employers along with the debt owed to them;
  8. Company overview and other factors which brings out the value as a going concern over and above the assets of the corporate debtor such as brought forward losses, input credit of GST, supply chain linkages, key customers, etc;
  9. Other information that may be relevant to the CoC.

According to Regulation 36 of the CIRP Regulations, the IM is required to be submitted to each member of the CoC by the RP within 95 days from the insolvency commencement date of the corporate debtor.  As per Regulation 36(4) of the CIRP Regulation, the RP can only share the IM with a member of the CoC or the PRA, as the case may be, after receiving an undertaking ensuring confidentiality of the contents of the IM. Further, in the case of the PRA, as per Section 29(2) of the Code, the following undertaking is required to be given:

  1. to comply with provisions of law for the time being in force relating to confidentiality and insider trading;
  2. to protect any intellectual property of the corporate debtor that the PRA may have access to; and
  3. not to share relevant information with third parties unless the aforementioned conditions are complied with.
  • Request for Resolution Plan

As per Regulation 36B(2) of the CIRP Regulations, the RFRP details the whole of the resolution process of the corporate debtor along with the corresponding timelines and also provides the manner for interaction between the RP and the PRA.

As per Regulation 36B(4A) of the CIRP Regulations, the RFRP is also required to mention that a performance security is required to be provided by the resolution applicant whose resolution plan would be approved by the NCLT which will be forfeited in case the resolution applicant fails to implement or contributes to the failure of implementation of the said resolution plan according to the terms of the resolution plan. The ‘performance security’ is the security which is specified in the RFRP with the approval of the CoC having regard to the nature of the resolution plan and the business of the corporate debtor.

As per Regulation 36B(4) of the CIRP Regulations, the RFRP should not request for any non-refundable deposit to be submitted along with the resolution plan.

  • Evaluation Matrix

EM is defined under Regulation 2(ha) of the CIRP Regulations. It provides the manner and weightage of different elements of resolution plan on the basis of which the CoC evaluates resolution plans. The EM prepared by the RP is required to be approved by the CoC prior to its issuance to the PRAs. In light of the directive enshrined in Regulation 39(3)(a) of the CIRP Regulations, the CoC is required to evaluate the resolution plan(s) strictly according to the EM.

Any modification in the EM is deemed to be a fresh issue and would provide a minimum 30 day time period to submit resolution plan(s) as per Regulation 36B(5) of the CIRP Regulations.

  1. TIME LIMIT FOR SUBMISSION OF A RESOLUTION PLAN

The RFRP is required to provide a minimum 30 day time period to the PRAs to submit their resolution plan(s), as per Regulation 36B(3) of the CIRP Regulations.

According to Regulation 39(1B) of the CIRP Regulations, the CoC should not consider a resolution plan received after the time specified in the RFRP. However, with respect to submission of a resolution plan after the cut-off date, the Supreme Court in the matter of Kalpraj Dharamshi vs. Kotak Investment Advisors Limited & Anr.  has held that the CoC can allow the late submission of a resolution plan as the commercial wisdom of the CoC cannot be intervened with.

Further, as per Regulation 36B(5) of the CIRP Regulations, any modification in the RFRP or the EM shall be deemed to be a fresh issue and shall be subject to the 30 day minimum time period as provided under Regulation 36B(3) of the CIRP Regulations.

If the resolution plans are not satisfactory, as per Regulation 36B(7) of the CIRP Regulations, the RP may with the approval of the CoC, reissue the RFRP, provided it is issued to all of the PRAs in the final list, and the minimum time period of 30 days for submission of resolution plan(s) as prescribed under Regulation 36B(3) of the CIRP Regulations shall not apply in the aforesaid case.

  1. CONTENTS OF A RESOLUTION PLAN

The requisite elements of a resolution plan that are required to be fulfilled by every PRA can be summarised by looking into Section 30(2) of the Code along with Regulation 37, 38 and 39 of the CIRP Regulations.

6.1    Necessary Requirements

The indispensable elements that are required to be present in a resolution plan submitted by a PRA is summarised herein under:

S.No. Requirement Regulation / Section
1. Time period for carrying out the resolution plan along with its implementation schedule. 38(2)(a) of CIRP Regulations
2. Provisions pertaining to management and control of the business of the corporate debtor during the term of the execution of the resolution plan. Section 30(2)(c) read with 38(2)(b) of CIRP Regulations
3. Means for supervising the implementation of the resolution plan. Section 30(2)(d) read with 38(2)(c) of CIRP Regulations
4. Manner in which proceedings in respect of avoidance transactions, if any, under Chapter III or fraudulent or wrongful trading under Chapter IV of Part II of the Code will be pursued after the approval of the resolution plan and the manner in which the proceeds, if any, from such proceedings shall be distributed. 38(2)(d) of CIRP Regulations
5. The resolution plan addresses the cause of default of the corporate debtor through the resolution plan. 38(3)(a) of CIRP Regulations
6. Feasibility and viability of the resolution plan. 38(3)(b) of CIRP Regulations
7. Provisions for effective implementation of the resolution plan. 38(3)(c) of CIRP Regulations
8. Provisions for securing requisite approvals and the timeline for the same. 38(3)(d) of CIRP Regulations
9. Provisions showcasing the capability of the PRA to implement the resolution plan. 38(3)(e) of CIRP Regulations
10. Ensure that the resolution plan does not contravene any of the provisions of the law for the time being in force. Section 30(2)(e)
11. Statement showcasing how the resolution plan shall deal with the interests of all of the stakeholders of the corporate debtor, including financial creditors and operational creditors. 38(1A) of CIRP Regulations
12. Statement providing insight as to whether the PRA or any of its related parties have failed to implement or contributed to the failure of implementation of any other resolution plan which was approved by the NCLT at any time in the past. 38(1B) of CIRP Regulations

 

6.2    Mandatory Payment obligations

The resolution plan presented by the PRA is also required to comply with certain payment obligations as per Section 30(2) of the Code and Regulation 38 of the CIRP Regulations which are summarised herein under:

  1. The resolution plan should contain provisions for payment of insolvency resolution process costs in priority to the payment of other debts of the corporate debtor.
  2. The payment of the debts of the operational creditors should not be less than-

(i)   the amount which would have been paid to such creditors in the event of a liquidation of the corporate debtor under Section 53 of the Code; or

(ii) the amount that would have been paid to such creditors if the amount to be distributed under the resolution plan had been distributed in accordance with the order of priority provided in section 53(1), whichever is higher.

  1. The resolution plan is required to provide for the payment of the debts of financial creditors who do not vote in favour of the resolution plan which shall not be less than the amount to be paid to such creditors in the event of liquidation of the corporate debtor under section 53(1) of the Code. They are also required to be paid in priority over financial creditors who voted in favour of the resolution plan.
  2. The amount payable under the resolution plan to the operational creditors is required to be paid in priority over financial creditors.
  • Measures that may be necessary for resolution of the Corporate Debtor:

The resolution plan is required to provide for the measures, as may be necessary, for resolution of the corporate debtor, inter alia, the following:

  1. Transfer of all or part of the assets of the corporate debtor to one or more persons;
  2. Sale of all or part of the assets whether subject to any security interest or not;
  3. Restructuring of the corporate debtor, by way of merger, amalgamation and demerger;
  4. Substantial acquisition of shares of the corporate debtor or the merger or consolidation of the corporate debtor with one or more persons;
  5. Cancellation or delisting of any shares of the corporate debtor, if applicable;
  6. Satisfaction or modification of any security interest;
  7. Curing or waiving of any breach of the terms of any debt due from the corporate debtor;
  8. Reduction in the amount payable to the creditors;
  9. Extension of a maturity date or a change in interest rate or other terms of a debt due from the corporate debtor;
  10. Amendment of the constitutional documents of the corporate debtor;
  11. Issuance of securities of the corporate debtor for cash, property, securities, or in exchange for claims or interests, or other appropriate purpose;
  12. Change in portfolio of goods or services produced or rendered by the corporate debtor;
  13. Change in technology used by the corporate debtor; and
  14. Obtaining necessary approvals from the Central and State Governments and other authorities, inter alia, approval of the Competition Commission of India if the resolution plan contains a provision for combination, as referred to in Section 5 of the Competition Act, 2002.
  15. Sale of one or more assets of corporate debtor to one or more successful resolution applicants submitting resolution plans for such assets; and manner of dealing with remaining assets.
  • Other attachments

As per Regulation 39 of the CIRP Regulations, certain documents are required to be furnished along with the resolution plan by the PRA:

  1. An affidavit stating that the PRA is eligible under Section 29A of the Code to submit a resolution plan. If during the subsistence of the CIRP proceedings, the PRA comes within the ambit of the ineligibility provided under Section 29A of the Code, it shall become ineligible to present a resolution plan for the corporate debtor;
  2. An undertaking by the PRA that every information and record provided in connection with or in the resolution plan is true and correct and discovery of false information and record at any time will render the PRA ineligible to continue in the CIRP proceedings, and would further lead to forfeiture of any refundable deposit, along with penal action under the Code.
  1. PROCESS FROM SUBMISSION OF A RESOLUTION PLAN TO APPROVAL BY THE NCLT 
  • Submission of a Resolution Plan

According to Section 30(1) read with Regulation 39 of the CIRP Regulations, a resolution plan is required to be submitted with the RP electronically within the time period prescribed in the RFRP.

As per Regulation 39(1A)(a) of the CIRP Regulations, the RP may allow modification of the resolution plan, if the RFRP provides for the same. However, the same can only be done once according to Regulation 39(1A) of the CIRP Regulations. Further, as per Regulation 39(1A)(b), the RP may use a challenge mechanism to enable PRAs to improve their plans if the RFRP provides for the same. 

  • Appraisal of the Resolution Plan by the Resolution Professional

The resolution plans are analysed by the RP to enquire whether the mandatory requirements as provided under Section 30(2) of the Code are complied with:

  1. payment of insolvency resolution process costs in priority to the repayment of other debts of the corporate debtor;
  2. the amount being paid to the operational creditors is not less than the amount that would have been paid to them in the case of liquidation of the corporate debtor under Section 53(1) of the Code or the amount that would have been paid to such creditors, if the amount to be distributed under the resolution plan had been distributed in accordance with the order of priority given in Section 53(1) of the Code, whichever is higher;
  3. the resolution plan provides for the payment of debts of financial creditors who do not vote in favor of the resolution plan which shall not be less than the amount to be paid to such creditors in accordance with Section 53(1) of the Code in the event of liquidation of the corporate debtor;
  4. the resolution plan provides for management of the affairs of the corporate debtor;
  5. the resolution plan provides for implementation and supervision of the resolution plan;
  6. there is no contravention of any of the provisions of the law for the time being in force
  • Placement of the Resolution Plan(s) before the CoC for its approval

The resolution plans which fulfil the criteria as provided in Section 30(2) of the Code read with regulation 37 to 39 of the CIRP Regulations are then placed before the CoC for further scrutiny along with the details and respective orders of the NCLT pertaining to the following transactions, if any, as per Regulation 39(2) of the CIRP Regulations:

  1. Preferential transactions as per Section 43 of the Code;
  2. Undervalued transactions as per Section 45 of the Code;
  3. Extortionate credit transactions as per Section 50 of the Code; and
  4. Fraudulent transactions as per Section 66 of the Code.

According to Regulation 39(3) of the CIRP Regulations, the CoC is required to evaluate the resolutions plans as per the evaluation matrix. The CoC is also bound to record its deliberations on the feasibility and viability of each resolution plan.

Further, as per Section 30(5) of the Code, the PRA has a right to attend the meeting of the CoC in which the resolution plan of the PRA would be considered. However, the PRA shall not have a right to vote at the meeting of the CoC unless such PRA is also a financial creditor.

  • Voting on the Resolution Plans by the CoC

As per Regulation 39(3B) of the CIRP Regulations, when two or more resolution plans are put to vote simultaneously then the resolution plan which receives the highest votes, but not less than 66%, is considered approved. However, in a case wherein two or more resolution plans receive equal votes, but not less 66%, the CoC is required to approve any one of them as per the tie-breaker formula announced before voting.

Further, in a case wherein none of the resolution plans receive 66%, the CoC is required to again vote on the resolution plan which received the highest votes.

  • Approval of a Resolution Plan by the CoC

According to Section 30(4) of the Code, the CoC by exercising its commercial wisdom and considering the feasibility, viability, order of priority as laid down in Section 53(1) of the Code, and value of security interest of a secured creditor is required to pass a resolution plan by a vote of not less than 66% voting share of financial creditors if they wish to approve the resolution plan.

The decision of the CoC to decide on whether or not to rehabilitate the corporate debtor by means of acceptance of a particular resolution plan is a decision that comes solely within the purview of the commercial wisdom of the CoC, which has also been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited vs. Satish Kumar Gupta and Ors.

Even in the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank and Ors(supra), the supremacy of the commercial wisdom of the CoC which is exercised by the CoC while approving a resolution plan is reiterated.

As per Section 30(6) of the Code read with Regulation 39(4) of the CIRP Regulations, the resolution plan that is passed by the CoC with a majority of 66% in voting is then required to be submitted by the RP at least 15 days before the maximum period for completion of the CIRP proceedings before the NCLT along with a compliance certificate in Form H of the Schedule and the evidence of receipt of performance security required under Regulation 36B(4A) of the CIRP Regulations for its approval.

However, in case the resolution plan submitted by a PRA contains a provision for combination, as referred to in Section 5 of the Competition Act, 2002, the PRA is also required to obtain the approval of the Competition Commission of India under that Act prior to the approval of such resolution plan by the CoC.

  • Approval of the Resolution Plan by the NCLT

The Code confers jurisdiction on the NCLT under Section 31 of the Code to reaffirm that the requirements under Section 30(2) of the Code are fulfilled by the resolution plan that has been passed by the CoC by a majority of 66% in voting. The NCLT is required to pass an Order approving the resolution plan if the requirements under Section 30(2) of the Code are complied with which shall bind the corporate debtor, its employees, members, creditors, guarantors, other stakeholders of the corporate debtor, Central Government, State Government, and any other local authority to whom a debt in respect of the payment of dues arising under any law for the time being in force is payable. The said order further ceases the order of moratorium passed against the corporate debtor by the NCLT under Section 14 of the Code and mandates that the records pertaining to the conduct of the CIRP proceedings and the resolution plan are forwarded to the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Board of India to be recorded in its database.

Further, under Section 31(4) of the Code, the successful resolution applicant is required to obtain the necessary approval required under any law for the time being in force within a period of one year from the date of approval of the resolution plan by the NCLT or within such period as provided for in such law, whichever is later.

About the Authors: Mr. Sandeep Bhuraria, Senior Partner and Monish Surendran, Senior Associate at Zeus Law Associates. Views are personal.


ZEUS News Alert (July-I)

WHETHER INTERIM RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL CAN CONSTITUTE THE COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS WITH A SINGLE OPERATIONAL CREDITOR?

In the present case, vide Order dated 20.01.2019, the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench (“NCLT”), initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) of M/s H.G S Diaries and Argo Limited (“Corporate Debtor”) and the Interim Resolution Professional (“IRP”) was appointed. Subsequently, the IRP discovered from the Master Data of the Corporate Debtor that on 02.02.2020 the Corporate Debtor was struck off by the Registrar of Companies for non-filing of returns. Further, only one claim was filed by an Operational Creditor in pursuance to the public announcement made by the IRP.

Pursuant thereto, the IRP filed an application under section 60(5) of the Code before the NCLT seeking dismissal of the CIRP proceedings of the Corporate Debtor. The NCLT was of the view that the IRP did not take enough steps in the CIRP proceedings of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, vide Order dated 06.12.2021, the NCLT dismissed the aforementioned application and directed the IRP to constitute the Committee of the Creditors (“CoC”) with the sole Operational Creditor. The NCLT further directed the IRP to restore the name of the Corporate Debtor Company under section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Aggrieved by the Order dated 06.12.2021, the IRP filed an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench (“NCLAT”)

DECISION OF THE NCLAT 

The NCLAT held that there is no provision in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) for the IRP to constitute the COC with a single operational creditor, hence the NCLT erred in directing the constitution of the CoC with a single operational creditor.

Furthermore, in light of the fact that the company was struck off and a single claim was received from an operational creditor, the NCLT erred in directing the IRP to continue with the CIRP proceedings of the Corporate Debtor.

In light of the above, the Hon’ble NCLAT allowed the appeal filed by the IRP, and the Order dated 06.12.2021 passed by the NCLT was set aside and therefore, the Corporate Debtor was released from the rigors of CIRP.

Reference: V. Duraisamy IRP of M/s. H G S Diaries and Agro Ltd. Vs. Jeyapriya Fruits and Vegetables Commission Agent [Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.25/2022]


CIRP Of Real Estate Companies - Project Specific Resolution

CIRP Of Real Estate Companies - Project Specific Resolution

Authors: Sandeep Bhuraria, Senior Partner and Monish Surendran, Senior Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in Live Law on 24th June 2023

In India, there was a need to enact a single statute encompassing provisions to resolve insolvency for companies, limited liability partnerships, partnership firms and individuals. In light of the same, the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) was passed and notified in the Gazette of India on 28 May 2016 thereby consolidating all of the insolvency laws pertaining to companies, limited liability partnerships, partnership firms and individuals. Under the Code, through a creditor driven process, distressed companies were given a chance to resolve themselves by utilising the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) provided in the Code.

Initially, in the Code there were general provisions for initiation of the CIRP proceedings of companies and hence, there were no specific provisions pertaining to real estate companies. However, the initiation of the CIRP proceedings of real estate giants like Amrapali Infrastructure Private Limited and Jaypee Infratech Limited and the non-inclusion of allottees as financial creditors under the Code created a hue and cry among the allottees and hence, it was apparent that the Code had to be amended.

As there were no specific provisions in the Code with regard to allottees, the allottees would approach consumer forums or Real Estate Regulatory Authorities to address their grievances with regard to delay in delivery of their respective units rather than approaching the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) under the Code.

However, in 2018, vide Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018 (26 of 2018), the legislature amended Section 5(8)(f) of the Code and inserted a provision stating that an amount raised from an allottee would qualify as a financial debt and hence, explicitly classified allottees as financial creditors and empowered allotees to file an application under Section 7 of the Code for initiating the CIRP proceedings of a real estate company. The said amendment was also upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Limited & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Thereafter, another change became prevalent in the CIRP proceedings of real estate companies, i.e., project specific invitation of resolution plans. As per the Code, expression of interest (“EOI”) for submitting a resolution plan for the corporate debtor as a whole was required to be undertaken. However, in various cases, no EOIs were received for submitting a resolution plan for the corporate debtor as a whole and hence, the committee of creditors of the corporate debtors would pass a resolution for inviting EOIs for submitting resolution plans for the projects of the corporate debtor. Hence, the applicability of the Code was being done in a manner which would accommodate the issues faced by real estate companies.

Subsequently, in February 2020, the need for confining the CIRP proceedings to the distressed project in question was observed by the bench of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Mr. Bansi Lal Bhat of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in the matter of Flat Buyers Association Vs. Umang Realtech Private Limited through IRP and Others. The NCLAT held that if the allottees, financial institutions / banks or operational creditors of a project initiate the CIRP proceedings of a real estate company then it should be confined to the said project and should not include other projects of the real estate company. It was observed that different projects of a real estate company would be situated at different places, where separate plans are approved by different authorities, landowners may be distinct from the real estate company in question and the allottees, financial institutions / banks and operational creditors of each project would also be different for each project.

It was held that the assets of the project under default should be maximized for balancing the interests of the creditors of the project in default. Further, it was held that the creditors of other real estate projects of the corporate debtor should not be included in the CIRP proceedings of the project in default.

Subsequently, vide Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020 (1 of 2020) dated 13.03.2020, the legislature incorporated a threshold on allottees for initiating the CIRP proceedings of a real estate company. A requirement of 100 homebuyers or 10% of the allottees of the same project, whichever is lower, was incorporated thereby restricting the filing of an application praying initiation of the CIRP of a Corporate Debtor to the project in default.

The threshold incorporated through Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act 2020 (1 of 2020) in Section 7 of the Code was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Manish Kumar Vs. Union of India & Anr. and it was affirmed that the allottees should be from the same project thereby affirming the tenet of law that the initiation of the CIRP proceedings could only be done by the allottees of the project in default.

Taking a cue from the decision of the NCLAT in the matter of Flat Buyers Association (supra), various NCLTs have passed orders initiating project specific CIRP in case of real estate companies. Certain matters in which project specific CIRP was initiated are provided herein below for reference:

  • Umesh Chander & Ors. Vs. GRJ Distributors & Developers Private Limited – Project Avalon Rosewood
  • Dreamz Sneh Project Allottees Welfare Association Vs. Dreamz Infra India Limited - Project Dreamz Sneh
  • Shakuntala Joshi and Ors. Vs. Hyper Techno Buildmart Private Limited and Ors. – Project Shree Madhav Residency
  • Anil Kaushal and Ors. Vs. Logix City Developers Private Limited - Project Blossom Zest
  • Ashok Kriplani Resolution Professional of Dreamz Infra India Limited vs. Venugopal Swamy Temple and Ors. – Project Dreamz Sumadhur

The concept of project specific CIRP was again utilized by the Hon’ble NCLAT in the case of Ajai Kumar Gupta Vs. Ashwani Kumar Singla (IRP of Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited). Allottees of the project “Fernhill” had initiated the CIRP proceedings of Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited which was challenged by the allottees of the other projects of the corporate debtor. The NCLAT vide Order dated 13.01.2023, in the interim, restricted the CIRP to the project in default, i.e., FernHill.

Further, in the case of Ram Kishor Arora Suspended Director of M/s. Supertech Limited versus Union Bank of India, an appeal was filed before the NCLAT challenging the initiation of the CIRP proceedings of Supertech Limited.  The NCLAT, vide an interim order dated 10.06.2022, restricted the CIRP proceedings to Eco Village-II and directed the IRP to constitute the CoC for the said project and invite resolution plans for the same. The said interim order was challenged before the Supreme Court in the case of Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Limited v Ram Kishore Arora & Ors; however, the Supreme Court declined to alter the directions passed by the NCLAT vide order dated 10.06.2022 with respect to Eco Village-II.

Even in the case of Ambika Prasad Sharma Erstwhile Director of Horizon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. vs. Horizon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., the NCLAT held that the CIRP should be restricted to a project in default.

Further, even the intent of the government is clear in this regard. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has recently published a discussion paper dated 18.01.2023 titled “Invitation of comments from the public on changes being considered to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016” wherein comments have been sought from the public for amending the Code for incorporating project specific CIRP in case of real estate companies.

Hence, it is probable that the Code will be suitably amended in the near future to incorporate project specific CIRP thereby making the Code more suitable to real estate companies and affirming the views of the courts with regard to project specific resolution.

“About the Authors: Mr. Sandeep Bhuraria, has been a practicing lawyer for about 30 years and is a Senior Partner at ZEUS Law Associates. He leads the Commercial Litigation and Restructuring division.

Monish Surendran, is a Senior Associate at ZEUS Law Associates and works in the Commercial Litigation and Restructuring division.”


Explained: Legal Framework for Import of Food and Packaged Food Products in India

Explained: Legal Framework for Import of Food and Packaged Food Products in India

Author: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner & Anisha Jhawar, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 21st June 2023

The new Foreign Trade Policy 2023 (‘FTP-23’) has come into force with effect from 1st April, 2023 with an aim to integrate Indian exporters and importers and for their deeper involvement in the global value chain. The Directorate General of Foreign Trade (‘DGFT’) overlooks the facilitation of the foreign trade in India.

With easy accessibility of different cuisines and types of food made available in India from across the Globe, the younger masses have been increasingly fascinated towards the imported packaged food. The import and sale of food products in India is allowed subject to the FTP-23, in addition to being subject to the domestic laws, acts, rules, regulations, orders, environmental and safety norms, technical specifications which are applicable to the domestically produced goods, including Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (‘FSS Act’), Food Safety and Standards (Import) Regulations, 2017, etc. It is mandatory for the importers to obtain an IEC Code (import-export code) prior to commencing of any import activities in India.

Key compliances for import of food items:

  • Quality in terms of taste, flavour, texture, nutritive value, etc. and packaging requirements provided under the FSS Act are the mandatory quintessential conditions to be observed before the consignment is allowed for customs clearance.
  • Edible food products which are governed by FSS Act, if imported, also need to have shelf-life of not less than 60% of the original shelf life or 3 months before expiry (whichever is lesser at the time of import).
  • In case of poultry products, meat and meat products, the goods are required to fulfil certain other compliances, including the sanitary, hygienic requirements as mentioned under the said FSS Act, as well as specific packaging, labelling and quality standards prior to customs clearance. A sanitary import permit is required to be obtained from Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Government of India in respect of import of meat and meat products of all kinds. However, beef, in any form or product containing beef in any form, falls under ‘prohibited’ category for imports, and the consignments imported are required to carry express declarations about the same.
  • The import of poultry and poultry products in India are further regulated as per the Livestock Importation Act, 1898.
  • In case of primary agricultural products, a bio security and sanitary-phyto sanitary import permit is required as per the conditions of Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import into India) Order, 2013.
  • The import of genetically modified food, feed and other genetically modified organism, living modified organisms are also subject to certain special conditions stipulated under the Environment Protection Laws.
  • The import of alcoholic beverages, in addition to being governed under the FSS Act, are also subject to several mandatory requirements of the State Governments.
  • All packaged products, if produced / packed / sold in domestic market, are subject to the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.

Further, for the import of food in India, certain documents such as ingredients list, specimen copy of the label, declaration about end usage, bill of entry, certificate of country of origin and FSSAI license are mandatory in nature, which are in addition of other conditional documents that are specific to a particular category of food imported.

The packaged food products imported in India need to also disclose the information about the product and the producer, such as – the name, address of the importer, generic/ common name of the commodity, net quantity in terms of standard units, month-year of packaging of the product when it is manufactured or packed or imported, maximum retail price (inclusive of local and all other taxes and charges), consumer care/ helpline information, etc.

India is the second largest import hub and market of food products in Asia and is rapidly emerging as one of the top five in the World. The importers looking at the enormous scope in India to tap on large consumer base, need to be diligent about the procedural nuances as well as statutory compliances and clearances required for import of the food products in India, including packaged food items and ingredients.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.)

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law Advisory.

Ms. Anisha Jhawar is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate and Commercial practice vertical.

ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.


ZEUS Newsletter June 2023

Highlights:

Corporate Brief

  • Notification dated 03.05.2023 issued by the Ministry of Finance on transactions done by Chartered Accountants (CA), Company Secretaries (CS), Certified Management Accountants (CMA) on behalf of their clients to be covered under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).
  • Circular dated 03.05.2023 issued by SEBI on introduction of Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) for issuers who have listed and/or propose to list non-convertible securities, securities debt instruments and security receipts.
  • Notification dated 10.05.2023 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) on the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Registrar of Companies) Second Amendment Rules, 2023.
  • Circular dated 22.05.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) on Dematerialization of securities of Hold Cos and SPVs held by Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs).

RERA Brief

  • Circular dated 09.05.2023 issued by Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding Landlord/Investor having area revenue share in real estate project to be treated as promoter and opening of separate bank account by such landowner /promoter or investor /promoter to open a separate bank account for deposit of 70% of the sale proceeds realized from the allotees of their share.
  • Order dated 15.05.2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding verification by MahaRERA to ascertain authenticity of commencement certificates and occupation certificates which are submitted by promoters.
  • Circular dated 23.05.2023 issued by Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding Anti money – laundering, counterfeiting the financing of terrorism , and combating proliferation financing guidelines for Real Estate Agents, 2023.
  • Order dated 24.05.2023 issued by Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding documents required for acceptance of completion certificate.
  • Order dated 29.05.2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding display of QR code in promotions/ advertisements material relating to Real Estate projects registered with MahaRERA. 

NCLT Brief

  • Whether a Section 9 petition under IBC is maintainable on an award which is under challenge under Section 34 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996? 

Litigation Brief 

  • NO CONVICTION CAN BE MADE IN A TRIAL IN THE APPELLATE COURT WITHOUT CALLING ON RECORDS OF THE CASE FROM THE TRIAL COURT
  • Vivad Se Vishwas II”: Government Issues Scheme to Settle Contractual Disputes 

 Corporate Brief

Notification dated 03.05.2023 issued by the Ministry of Finance on transactions done by Chartered Accountants (CA), Company Secretaries (CS), Certified Management Accountants (CMA) on behalf of their clients to be covered under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). 

  • The Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) vide its notification dated 03.05.2023 notified that the financial transactions carried out by (i) an individual who obtained a certificate of practice under section 6 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 and practicing individually or through a firm, in whatever manner it has been constituted; (ii) an individual who obtained a certificate of practice under section 6 of the Company Secretaries Act, 1980 and practicing individually or through a firm, in whatever manner it has been constituted; (iii) an individual who has obtained a certificate of practice under section 6 of the Cost and Works Accountants Act, 1959 and practicing individually or through a firm, in whatever manner it has been constituted, on behalf of his client, in the course of his or her profession, in relation to the following activities:
    1. buying and selling of any immovable property;
    2. managing of client money, securities or other assets;
    3. management of bank, savings or securities accounts;
    4. organization of contributions for the creation, operation or management of companies;
    5. creation, operation or management of companies, limited liability partnerships or trusts, and buying and selling of business entities

shall be included under the ambit of the definition of “person carrying on designated business or profession” By virtue of this inclusion the persons mentioned above have also been included in the definition of ‘Reporting Entity’ under the Act.

Circular dated 03.05.2023 issued by SEBI on introduction of Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) for issuers who have listed and/or propose to list non-convertible securities, securities debt instruments and security receipts. 

  • According to Circular dated 03.05.2023 issued by SEBI issuers having outstanding listed non-convertible securities as on 31.08.2023 shall report/ obtain and report the LEI code (a unique 20 - character code to identify legal distinct entities that engage in financial transactions) in the Centralized Database of corporate bonds, on or before 01.09.2023. Similarly, issuers having outstanding listed securitized debt instruments and security receipts as on 31.08.2023 shall report/ obtain and report the LEI code to the Depository(ies), on or before 01.09.2023.
  • Further, issuers proposing to issue and list non-convertible securities on or after 01.09.2023 shall report the LEI code in the Centralized Database of corporate bonds at the time of allotment of the ISIN. Also, issuers proposing to issue and list securitized debt instruments and security receipts, on or after 01.09.2023 shall report the LEI code to the Depositories at the time of allotment of ISIN.
  • Entities can obtain the LEI code from any of the Local Operating Units (LOUs) accredited by the Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation (GLEIF). In India the LEI Code can be obtained from Legal Entity Identifier India Limited (LEIL) which has been recognized by the RBI as an issuer of LEI under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 and is accredited by the GLEIF as the LOU for issuance and management of LEI codes.
  • The Depositories are also required to map the LEI code to the existing ISINs by 30.09.2023 and for future issuances, map the LEI code provided by the issuers with the ISIN at the time of activation of the ISIN.

Notification dated 10.05.2023 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) on the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Registrar of Companies) Second Amendment Rules, 2023. 

  • The Ministry of Corporate Affairs issued notification dated 10.05.2023 on the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Registrar of Companies) Second Amendment Rules, 2023.
  • Vide the notification dated 10.05.2023 3 new provisos were inserted under Rule 4 of the said Rules to the effect that:
    1. No company shall file an application unless it has filed overdue financial statements under section 137 and overdue annual returns under section 92, up to the end of the financial year in which the company ceased to carry its business operations;
    2. In case a company intends to file the application after the action under sub-section (1) of section 248 has been initiated by the Registrar, it shall file all pending financial statements under section 137 and all pending annual returns under section 92, before filing the application;
    3. Once notice under sub-section 5 of section 248 has been issued by the Registrar for publication pursuant to the action initiated under sub-section (1) of section 248, a company shall not be allowed file the application under this sub-rule.

Circular dated 22.05.2023 issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India on Dematerialization of securities of Hold Cos and SPVs held by Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs). 

  • In order to promote dematerialization of securities, encourage ease of doing business, improve transparency in the dealings of securities of Hold Cos/ SPVs, it has been decided that InvITs shall henceforth hold securities of Hold Cos and SPVs in dematerialized form only.
  • As per the circular dated 22.05.2023 issued by SEBI, regulation 14(4)(r) of SEBI (Infrastructure Investment Trusts) Regulations, 2014 provides that the units of InvIT shall be issued only in dematerialized form to all applicants.
  • For existing securities held by InvITs in Hold Cos and SPVs in physical form, it is directed that the Investment Managers are required to dematerialize the securities the securities so held by the InvIT on or before 30.06.2023.

Real Estate Brief

Circular dated 09.05.2023 issued by Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding Landlord/Investor having area revenue share in real estate project to be treated as promoter and opening of separate bank account by such landowner /promoter or investor /promoter to open a separate bank account for deposit of 70% of the sale proceeds realized from the allotees of their share.

  • Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority vide its circular dated 09.05.2023 re-examned its circular dated 13.02.2018 and partial modified the same to incorporate the following:
    1. Under joint development agreement route, land owner who has provided the land for construction and the promoter who has invested the money for construction shall be deemed to be the promoters and will be joint liable for the responsibilities and the functions.
    2. Only one separate escrow account shall be opened in a scheduled bank to park the seventy percent amount realized for the real estate project from the allottees from time to time to cover the cost of construction.
    3. The landowner/promoter even though entitled to a share of the total area to be developed under "Joint Development Agreement" route shall not be permitted to open a separate bank account.

Order dated 15.05.2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding verification by MahaRERA to ascertain authenticity of commencement certificates and occupation certificates which are submitted by promoters.

  • Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (“Maha-RERA”) vide its order no. 45/2023 dated 15.05.2023 issued directions verification by MahaRERA to ascertain authenticity of commencement certificates and occupation certificates which are submitted by promoters.
  • Following guidelines have been laid down in the said order:
    1. With effect from 19.06.2023, the commencement certificate along with registration application submitted by the promoter shall be compared for authenticity with the application and certificate attached and forwarded to the designated email of MahaRERA.
    2. Subsequently, on the confirmation of the authenticity of the certificate being issued by the competent authority, the application submitted by the promoter for registration of real estate project shall be processed for further grant of MahaRERA project registration certificate.
    3. The above mentioned procedure shall be followed until the respective competent authorities integrate their website with the website of MahaRERA. 

Circular dated 23.05.2023 issued by Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding Anti money – laundering, counterfeiting the financing of terrorism , and combating proliferation financing guidelines for Real Estate Agents, 2023.

Order dated 24.05.2023 issued by Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding documents required for acceptance of completion certificate.

  • Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority vide its amending order dated 24.05.2023 issued directions in respect of documents required for acceptance of completion certificate.
  • Under the said order following categorization was done for submission of documents:
    1. Plotted Development Projects (situated in urban area and are approved as per Township Policy) - Mortgage Free Letter from the local authority, or in case plots are not mortgaged promoters must provide evidence to the Authority if plots are not included in the approved layout plan, such as a letter from the Local Authority or an RTI application for a certificate confirming no plot mortgages. A Completion Certificate from a Chartered Engineer may also be accepted by the Authority.
    2. Plotted Development Projects ( situated in rural area) – Completion Certificate issued by the committee headed by Collector or the SDO as the case may be in accordance with Government of Rajasthan Revenue (Group-IV) No. F.6(6)Rev.6/92/Pt. / 14 dated 02.04.2007 and as amended by Government of Rajasthan Revenue (Group-IV) No. F.6(6)Rev.6/2014/50 dated 29.06.2021, as per amended rule 9.
    3. Other than plotted development project - Completion Certificate issued by Local Authority, or Completion Certificate issued by Empanelled Architect in the prescribed format along with the check list along with fee receipt and acknowledgement letter of submission of CC in Local Authority.

Order dated 29.05.2023 issued by Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding display of QR code in promotions/ advertisements material relating to Real Estate projects registered with MahaRERA.

  • Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (“Maha-RERA”) vide its order no. 46/2023 dated 29.05.2023 issued directions in respect of display of QR code in promotions/ advertisements material relating to Real Estate projects registered with MahaRERA.
  • In the said order it has been mentioned that promoters are bound to display QR Code on each and every advertisement or promotion done for that particular project. This shall apply on every advertisement made in a newspaper, magazines, printed flyers, standees on project sites and sales office, websites or webpages of project.
  • Further, QR code must be published in a way that is legible and readable for homebuyer and also detectable with software application. And it should be published besides MahaRERA registration number and the website address.

NCLT Brief

Whether a Section 9 petition under IBC is maintainable on an award which is under challenge under Section 34 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996?

BRIEF FACTS

An appeal was filed by the M/s. KK Ropeways Ltd. (“Appellant”) before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench (“NCLAT”) challenging the impugned order dated 27.04.2021 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench (“Adjudicating Authority”) whereby the Adjudicating Authority had dismissed the application filed by the Appellant under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC ”)

On 29.11.2018 an arbitral award was passed by the Arbitrator under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in the arbitration proceedings between the Appellant and M/s. Billion Smiles Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. (“Corporate Debtor”) in favor of the Appellant for recovery of Rs. 26,33,022/- along with interest @15% per annum from the Corporate Debtor.  The date from which such debt fell due was 19.01.2018. The arbitral award was passed on account of non-payment of the rental dues as per the lease agreement by the Corporate Debtor to the Appellant.

Being aggrieved by the arbitral award, the Corporate Debtor had filed an appeal under Section 34 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 before High Court of Delhi assailing the arbitral award, during the pendency of the Section 9 IBC proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority.

QUESTION OF LAW

Whether the petition under Section 9 of IBC filed by the Appellant is maintainable on an arbitral award which is under challenge u/s 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?

OBSERVATIONS BY NCLAT

The Hon’ble NCLAT observed that as per the provisions of IBC ‘dispute’ means and includes raising a dispute before a court of law or an arbitral tribunal before the receipt of the demand notice under Section 8 of IBC. The dispute shall truly exist and should not be spurious, imaginary and hypothetical. Further, it was observed that the Appellant had secured an ex-parte award in its favour against which the Corporate Debtor has filed an appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

In the present case, the arbitral award was based on the rental dispute and when the appeal was filed by the Corporate Debtor against the arbitral award, the operational debt is considered to be under dispute. The Hon’ble Tribunal further opined that so long as the arbitration award was challenged, the operational debt in the instant appeal is considered to be under dispute and hence, the arbitration and insolvency proceedings cannot go on together.

CONCLUSION

The Hon’ble NCLAT came to the conclusion that the view arrived by the Adjudicating Authority while dismissing the Section 9 petition under IBC for recovery of the sum awarded in the arbitration proceeding is free from any errors. Hence, the Hon’ble NCLAT dismissed the instant appeal.

Case referred – M/s. KK Ropeways Ltd. v. M/s. Billion Smiles Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. [Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS.) No. 246 of 2021].

Litigation Brief

NO CONVICTION CAN BE MADE IN A TRIAL IN THE APPELLATE COURT WITHOUT CALLING ON RECORDS OF THE CASE FROM THE TRIAL COURT

CASE ANALYSIS: JITENDRA KUMAR RODE V. UNION OF INDIA [PRONOUNCED BY THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN 2023 SCC OnLine SC 485]

In the captioned appeal in the Hon’ble Supreme Court against a judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad High Court, the Division Bench consisting of Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Sanjay Kaul, while upholding the conviction of an accused under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 laid down that the court of appeal should mandatorily call on record for the case of respective trial court which should be an obligation as well as duty laid under interpretation of Section 385 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Brief Background:

In the current case, the trial court had convicted the accused way back in 1999 and sentenced him to a rigorous imprisonment of one year with fine of ₹500 under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act and that of 2 years conviction and fine of ₹500 under Section 13(2) of the abovementioned act.

This was challenged by the appellant in Allahabad court of appeal criticizing the trial court’s order of conviction against him. The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad summoned the trial court to furnish on record the case of the Appellant and the explanation as to how they took the decision against the Appellant, to which no reply was received from their end.

The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad concluded that the trial court lost all records against the appellant being non-traceable and the information sent is non-relevant to the case of the appellant. The trial court was found non-compliant with the rules as well as the records they served were not endorsed by the Central Bureau of Investigation. However, the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad High Court convicted the appellant with the same charges, despite the gross misconduct of the trial court.

Observation and Decision of the Supreme Court:

The Apex court noted that despite instructions by the Hon’ble High Court, documents such as the witness statements, statements under Section 313 CrPC were neither available nor were reconstructed. Therefore, upholding conviction in the absence of such documents cannot be said to be in consonance with due process of law and fairness. The onus to produce the missing record was put on the Appellant which is an erroneous decision taken by the Hon’ble High Court. It is the right of the appellant to have the documents perused on record by the trial court.

The Apex court laid down in this judgment that it is not the duty of the court of appeal to hinge on the decision of the lower court, but there should be a proper scrutiny of the process of law by calling on record the documents and the arguments advanced should be observed and analyzed before making a conclusion.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court further held that protection of the rights under Article 21 entails the right to life and liberty and there should be protection of liberty from any restriction. Therefore, in the absence of fair trial and legal procedure which includes the opportunity for the person filing an appeal to question the order of the lower court and the same can only be done when the record is available with the Court of Appeal.

Concluding the judgment, the Apex court held that there is no straitjacket formula to the procedure of court, but the non-compliance of the mandate leads to the violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which is erroneous in the eyes of law and should not be done.

“Vivad Se Vishwas II”: Government Issues Scheme to Settle Contractual Disputes

Objective of the Scheme

  1. The Scheme has been issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India on 29.05.2023. A one- time settlement scheme, “Vivad se Vishwas”, has been launched with the intent to clear the backlog of old litigation cases which are holding back fresh investment, reducing the ease of doing business with the government, tying up scarce working capital and indirectly reducing competition for newly floated tenders.
  1. The purpose/objective of this Scheme is to settle and end certain disputes, where one of the parties is the Government of India or its entities where the judgement/award has been passed by an adjudicating authority, by paying certain percentage of the awarded sum, to avoid further litigation and save government resources.

Details:

  1. The scheme shall come into force from 15.07.2023 and claims can be submitted by the contractors by 31.10.2023.
  2. Eligibility for availing the Scheme:
  3. The dispute must have arisen out of a contract whereon of the parties is Government of India/its entities including Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs), Autonomous Bodies of the Government of India, public sector banks and public sector financial institutions, Union Territories without legislature and all agencies/ undertakings thereof; all organisations, like Metro Rail Corporations, where Government of India has shareholding of 50%[1] (referred to as the “Procuring Entities”).
  4. CPSEs, who are contractors to the aforesaid procuring entities, are also eligible to file their claim under this Scheme.
  5. Scheme is applicable to all kinds of procurement including procurement of goods, services and works.
  6. The claim/award shall only be for monetary value passed by a court/arbitral tribunal.
  7. Cases should only relate to domestic arbitration, cases under international commercial arbitration are not eligible to be settled under the Scheme.
  8. Cases where Arbitral Awards have been passed upto 31.01.2023 and Court Awards passed upto 30.04.2023.
  9. Contractors can also opt for this Scheme in cases where awards direct payment of money from them to the Procuring Entities.
  10. Amount payable under the Scheme:
  11. For Court Awards passed upto 30.04.2023 – 85% of the net amount awarded/upheld by the Court or 85% of the claim lodged by the contractor under this scheme, whichever is lower.
  12. For Arbitral Awards passed upto 31.01.2023– 65% of the net amount awarded/upheld by the Court or 85% of the claim lodged by the contractor under this scheme, whichever is lower.
  13. Interest at the rate of 9% shall be payable on the 85%/65% amount, as the case may be, irrespective of any rate of interest as provided in the award/judgement.
  14. In case the Government of India/its entities challenge an arbitral award, 75% of the award amount has to be paid to the contractor, against a Bank guarantee (BG) of equivalent amount, before filing of the challenge in the court. Such amounts paid to the contractor shall be adjusted with the amounts due under the present scheme. However, no reimbursement of BG charges will be made to the contractor.
  15. The Government of India/its entities shall be obligated to accept the claims lodged by a contractor and make an offer under this scheme if the claims do not exceed Rs. 500 Crores. Only if claims exceeding Rs. 500 crores can the Government of India/its entities refuse the contractors request to settle. Such denial shall be communicated to the contractor within 60 days of the settlement request.

Procedure:

  1. Contractors should submit their claims through Government e-Marketplace (GeM) online portal. For non- GeM contracts of Ministry of Railways, contractors should register their claims on IREPS (ireps.gov.in).
  2. The registered contractor shall list out the eligible disputes, which it is willing to settle under this scheme, on the portal and provide details of the dispute including contract number, contracting authority, paying authority, net award amount (as detailed in para 10 (a) and 10 (b) of the scheme), claim amount with details thereof and the status of the dispute.
  3. GeM to initiate these details to the Government of India/its entities and such entity shall verity the claim details and update the same if required.
  4. The Government of India/ its entities shall evaluate the settlement amount due, as per this scheme, and make an offer to the contractor within two weeks of receipt of claims on the portal which shall either be accepted or rejected by the contractor within 30 calendar days. Immediately on acceptance of the settlement offer under the scheme, an automatic acknowledgement email shall be received by the parties.
  5. The contractor shall within 45 days (or longer period if permitted by the entity) from the date of the acknowledgement email file application for withdrawal of the case before the court.
  6. Thereafter, the settlement agreement may be digitally signed by both the parties which shall have the same effect as a settlement agreement consequent to successful conciliation as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Government of India/its entities or the contractor, as the case may be, shall make payments within 30 days of the execution of the settlement agreement.
  7. If the contractor does not accept the offer, the ongoing litigation process may continue.

****

Disclaimer:

For private circulation to the addressee only and not for re-circulation. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/ or publication of this Newsletter is strictly prohibited. This Newsletter is not intended to be an advertisement or solicitation. The contents of this Newsletter are solely meant to inform and is not a substitute for legal advice. Legal advice should be obtained based on the specific circumstances of each case, before relying on the contents of this Newsletter or prior to taking any decision based on the information contained in this Newsletter. ZEUS Law disclaims all responsibility and accepts no liability for the consequences of any person acting, or refraining from acting, on such information. If you have received this Newsletter in error, please notify us immediately by telephone. Copyright © 2014 ZEUS Law. All rights reserved. Replication or redistribution of content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of ZEUS Law.

[1] These organizations can opt out of this scheme with approval of the Board of Directors.


Proposed Indian Carbon Market Framework: Buy and Sell Carbon Credits

Proposed Indian Carbon Market Framework: Buy and Sell Carbon Credits

Author: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner, and Nitika Bakshi, Associate at ZEUS Law

Published in https://www.asiancommunitynews.com on 12th June 16, 2023

India, as a developing nation, has been at the forefront of climate action and has set an ambitious Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) goal of reducing the emissions intensity of the GDP by 45% by 2030 against 2005 levels. In its endeavor towards a greener and more sustainable future, the government of India is planning to develop the Indian Carbon Market (ICM) to decarbonize the Indian economy through the trading of carbon credit certificates.

Carbon markets are trading systems in which carbon credits are bought and sold. Entities may compensate for their green-house gas (GHG) emissions by purchasing carbon credits from entities that remove or reduce GHG emissions. Carbon finance is expected to be the key for implementation of NDCs and the Paris Agreement enables the use of such market mechanisms to aid countries in achieving their NDC goals.

India currently has an energy savings-based market mechanism wherein energy savings certificates are issued to designated consumers whose energy consumption is less than the prescribed norms, and designated consumers whose energy consumption is more than the prescribed norms and standards shall be entitled to purchase the energy savings certificate to comply with the prescribed norms and standards. With the enactment of the Energy Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2022 the government has been empowered to specify a carbon trading scheme. As per the Energy Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2022 the Central Government, or any agency authorized by it, may issue carbon credit certificate to the registered entity which complies with the requirements of the carbon credit trading scheme and such entity is entitled to purchase or sell the carbon credit certificate in accordance such scheme. The Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Ministry of Power along with the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change are developing and finalizing the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme. Recently, a draft of the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme was circulated by the Ministry of Power to various industry bodies for comments and stakeholder consultation was organized.

The scheme envisages the development of a compliance mechanism under which obligated entities shall comply with the prescribed GHG emission norms which will be developed and aligned with India’s emissions trajectory as per climate goals, and a voluntary mechanism where non-obligated entities can register their projects for GHG emission reduction or removal for issuance of carbon credit certificates. It is proposed that each carbon certificate issued will represent reduction or removal of one ton of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e). Projects that may be eligible to earn carbon credits include waste handling and disposal, afforestation and reforestation, cattle management, transportation, renewable energy, energy efficiency projects and industrial energy efficiency and emission reduction projects.

The draft Carbon Credit Trading Scheme proposes to set up a comprehensive institutional and governance structure for the execution of the ICM, which includes the following:

  • The Indian Carbon Market Governing Board (ICMGB): The governance of the ICM and direct oversight of its administrative and regulatory functioning will vest in the ICMGB.
  • The Bureau of Energy Efficiency will be the ICM Administrator for the ICM and shall also work as the secretariat for the ICMGB. The Bureau will also have the power to constitute technical committees.
  • The Grid Controller of India Limited will be the ICM Registry.
  • The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) shall be the Regulator for the trading activities under the ICM. As per the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme the Commission shall approve the participation of power exchanges for the purpose of ICM trading, from time to time and that power exchanges will perform functions regarding trading of carbon credit certificates, in accordance with regulations notified by the Commission.

These institutions will develop detailed procedures for operationalizing ICM including the following:

  • Criteria for issuance of carbon credit certificates to those obligated entitles who reduce their GHG emissions below the prescribed limit;
  • Validity of carbon credit certificates;
  • Floor and forbearance price of carbon credit certificates;
  • Requirement, format and timeline for submissions;
  • Monitoring, reporting and verification;

According to the draft Carbon Credit Trading Scheme, agencies accredited by the Bureau of Energy Efficiency as Accredited Carbon Verifiers will carry out validation or verification activities under the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme.

It is envisioned that the ICM will usher in new emission mitigation opportunities through demand for emission credits by private and public entities. A well designed, competitive carbon market mechanism would enable the reduction of GHG emissions at the level of the entity as well as the overall sector and drive faster adoption of cleaner technologies in a burgeoning economy like India. ICM will accelerate the transition to a low carbon economy and facilitate in meeting India’s NDC goal.

The establishment of the ICM and the development of the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme heralds new opportunities for stakeholders at various levels of the carbon trading ecosystem including developing methodologies for the estimation of carbon emissions, reductions and removals from registered projects, stipulating the required validation, verification and issuance processes for operationalizing the scheme, carrying out validation or verification activities,  capacity building of entities for up-skilling in the subject matter etc. It is believed that carbon markets may be a panacea for the current climate crisis and can help accelerate the transformation to a more sustainable future by creating an economic incentive for reducing emissions.

It would be beneficial for stakeholders and sector experts to closely observe the establishment of ICM and engage with it first-hand in order to contribute towards moving to a more sustainable economy.

(This Article is solely for information purposes, does not constitute legal or professional advisory and should not be relied upon or used as a substitute for legal advice from attorney.) 

****

About the Authors: Jayshree Navin Chandra, Senior Partner at ZEUS Law, has been a practicing lawyer since 2001 with extensive corporate and transactional advisory experience. She advises and represents clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to start-ups as well as Central and State Government departments and public bodies in a wide range of domestic and cross border transactions, across industries in practice areas including Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Data privacy and protection, Intellectual Property, Technology & Commercial Law Advisory. 

Nitika Bakshi, is an Associate at ZEUS Law and works in the Corporate, Technology & Commercial Law practice vertical.

 ZEUS Law Associates is an ISO certified full service corporate commercial law firm with a team of dedicated and experienced lawyers well versed in handling domestic and cross border transactions across sectors, jurisdictions and regulatory landscapes. The firm’s practice areas include Corporate and Company Law, M&A and Joint Venture, Private Equity, FDI & FII, Real Estate and Infrastructure, Intellectual Property & Commercial Law, Litigation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, Indirect Tax and NRI Services.