LexAI
RESOLUTIONBAZAARBY LEXAI
login
Strategic Insolvency Advisory • IBC Section 29A(c) Proviso

Section 29A NPA Pre-Bid Cure & Holding Structure De-Risking

The Supreme Court of India in ArcelorMittal (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta established that Section 29A(c) disqualification is triggered if a resolution applicant, its promoter, or any person acting jointly has an account classified as an NPA for over one year. We architect court-tested pre-bid remediation, OTS cleanups, and de-risking structures to guarantee statutory eligibility before Form G closure.

Fast-Track Senior Counsel Retainer

Section 29A(c) NPA Cure & Legal Opinion Retainer

Privileged & Confidential

Submissions are protected under Advocate-Client Privilege pursuant to Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 / BSA 2023.

Statutory Defense Lifecycle

The 4-Stage Section 29A Remediation Protocol

NCLT Court-Tested
STAGE 01

Multi-Tier Inquest Scan

Exhaustive background audit across MCA21, RBI CRILC databases, and eCourts to isolate historical promoter shareholdings and dormant NPA classifications.

STAGE 02

Proviso (c) NPA Cure

Negotiating bank OTS repayments and obtaining No Dues Certificates (NDCs) with interest settlements under Section 29A(c) Proviso prior to EOI submission.

STAGE 03

Holding Separation

Corporate restructuring and restructuring cross-directorships under Section 29A(j) to sever connected person linkages and eliminate collateral contagion.

STAGE 04

Senior Counsel Opinion

Issuance of a formal, court-admissible Section 29A Clearance Opinion and Regulation 36A Affidavit signed by Advocate Atul Grover for submission to the RP and CoC.

Judicial Authority & Landmark Precedents
ArcelorMittal India Pvt. Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors. (2019) 2 SCC 1

The Supreme Court ruled that the date of submission of the resolution plan is the crucial date for testing disqualification under Section 29A. NPAs cleared prior to plan submission restore eligibility under the Proviso.

Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India (2019) 4 SCC 17

Affirmed the constitutional validity of Section 29A, establishing that only persons having proximate and substantial control or management with an NPA account are barred, not unconnected relatives.