TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the holder of redeemable preference shares, claiming non-redemption and default under the subscription arrangement, could be treated as a financial creditor with a financial debt so as to maintain an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Analysis: The application arose from an investment made through cumulative non-convertible redeemable preference shares under a subscription agreement. The applicant relied on the fixed return structure, redemption schedule, and the alleged default in redemption to contend that the transaction had the commercial effect of borrowing and involved consideration for the time value of money. The Corporate Debtor contended that redeemable preference shares remain share capital, that redemption is governed by company law, and that non-redemption does not convert the shareholder into a creditor. On the facts, the Tribunal found that the claim was founded on the non-redemption of preference shares and not on repayment of a debt. It held that the claim did not fall within the scope of financial debt under section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and that section 55 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the related share capital rules did not permit the claim to be treated as an ordinary debt enforceable under section 7.
Conclusion: The applicant was not a financial creditor, the claim was not a financial debt, and the application under section 7 was not maintainable.
Final Conclusion: The insolvency petition failed because a redeemable preference shareholder could not, on these facts, invoke the corporate insolvency resolution process as a financial creditor for non-redemption of preference shares.
Ratio Decidendi: Non-redemption of redeemable preference shares, by itself, does not constitute a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the holder of such shares does not become a financial creditor merely because redemption is due or disputed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
