Abstract

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC), a landmark piece of legislation, aims to provide an all-inclusive and persuasive framework for bankruptcy settlement in India. However, there have been a few constitutional issues with the IBC's application and interpretation. These challenges have an impact on the rights and interests of corporate debtors and creditors, as well as the general effectiveness and efficiency of the bankruptcy process. The most important constitutional concerns and IBC implications for Indian corporate debtors and creditors are examined in this article. The three IBC components that are discussed in this article are the categorization of creditors, the function and regulation of resolution professionals, and the length and extension of the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP). The legal argument raised against these components before the Supreme Court and the High Courts is examined in the article, along with the decisions reached by these courts. The article also discusses the objectives and outcomes of the IBC, as well as how these decisions may affect corporate debtors' and creditors' rights and interests. The author concludes that the Supreme Court played a significant role in dealing with these concerns and upholding the validity of the IBC and its provisions. The Supreme Court has also provided guidance and clarity on a variety of issues relating to the IBC and its provisions. The Supreme Court has balanced the interests of all parties involved and made sure that the IBC reaches its goals of maximizing asset value, encouraging entrepreneurship, increasing credit availability, and balancing the interests of all parties involved.

Keywords