Execution of an Award or Decree during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP): The Controversy between CIRP and Arbitral Awards as well as other Decree Holders

Abstract

The coexistence of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the 1996 Act) has sparked a complex legal discourse surrounding the execution of arbitral awards in the context of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The analysis attempts to shed a light on the issue of executing an arbitral award during CIRP by thoroughly exploring the chronological progression of the judicial stance on this matter. This involves a dual exploration: first, evaluating the legality of entertaining an application based on a court decree or arbitral award, and second, addressing the issue of calculating the time limit for such applications. This exploration will be facilitated through a comprehensive review of pertinent judgments rendered by the esteemed National Company Law Tribunals (NCLT), the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), and the apex authority, the Supreme Court. By tracing the evolution of judicial interpretations and decisions, a deeper understanding of the nuanced aspects surrounding the maintainability of applications derived from decrees or awards and the intricacies of time limitation calculation will be uncovered. The study explores the question of whether an arbitral award constitutes a claim against the corporate debtor. It also explores the maintainability of arbitral awards or decrees by other adjudicating authorities like Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRT) and Real Estate Regulatory Authorities (RERA), and touches upon the execution of foreign arbitral awards.