NewKerala.com

IBC Reforms Miss Real Estate Sector, Despite High Case Backlog: ICRA

Credit rating agency ICRA states that while proposed amendments to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) are encouraging, they fail to address critical, sector-specific reforms needed for the real estate and construction industry. The sector continues to account for the second-highest share of ongoing corporate insolvency cases. ICRA highlights that despite the IBC's overall success, recovery timelines have elongated and steep haircuts for lenders persist, with recoveries averaging only about 32% of admitted claims. The agency emphasizes that reducing massive delays at the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which has a backlog of over 30,000 cases, is crucial for the reforms to be effective.

Key Points: IBC Amendments Skip Real Estate Reforms, Says ICRA

  • Misses real estate reforms
  • Improves recovery for non-real estate
  • NCLT delays remain a bottleneck
  • Recoveries average 32% of claims
  • Over 30,000 cases pending at NCLT
3 min read

Proposed IBC amendments positive but miss real estate sector reforms: ICRA

ICRA says proposed IBC amendments are positive but fail to address structural issues in real estate, the sector with the second-highest insolvency cases.

"Real estate sector-specific reforms have not been addressed in the current proposals... - ICRA"

New Delhi, December 29

The proposed amendments to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code are encouraging. They could help improve recovery rates and reduce resolution timelines. Still, credit rating agency ICRA noted that the changes do not address long-standing structural issues in the real estate sector, which continues to account for the second-highest share of cases under the corporate insolvency resolution process.

"Real estate sector-specific reforms have not been addressed in the current proposals despite the fact that the real estate and construction sector has the second highest share in cases ongoing in CIRP," the agency said.

In a press release, ICRA said that while the recommendations from the Lok Sabha Select Committee (SCLB) and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) are expected to strengthen the IBC framework, the benefits are likely to be limited mainly to non-real estate cases.

The rating agency pointed out that sector-specific reforms for real estate and construction have not been included, despite the sector's significant presence in ongoing insolvency cases as of September 30, 2025.

ICRA noted that protecting homebuyers and resolving stalled housing projects have been key government priorities over the years; therefore, structural changes tailored to the real estate sector remain critical.

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, which marked its ninth anniversary in October 2025, has resulted in total recoveries of around Rs 4 lakh crore and delivered better outcomes than other recovery mechanisms, ICRA said.

However, lenders continue to face steep haircuts, with recoveries from successful resolution plans averaging about 32 per cent of admitted claims through September 2025.

According to ICRA, recovery timelines under the IBC have further elongated, with recovery rates dipping in the first half of FY2026 after improving till the fourth quarter of FY2025. Data as of September 30, 2025, show that nearly three-fourths of ongoing CIRP cases have exceeded 270 days post-admission, according to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), well beyond the mandated timeline.

Manushree Saggar, Senior Vice President and Group Head, Structured Finance Ratings at ICRA, said that while the SCLB recommendations are expected to improve recovery rates and reduce timelines, delays at the NCLT continue to be a major bottleneck.

Saggar noted, "The recommendations of SCLB, if passed, are expected to improve recovery rates and reduce timelines for the CIRP process under IBC."

As of March 2025, over 30,000 IBC cases were pending before the NCLT, and at the current capacity, it could take more than a decade to clear them.

ICRA highlighted that key proposed amendments, such as group insolvency, cross-border insolvency, creditor-initiated insolvency, and allowing multiple or asset-wise resolution plan,s could improve outcomes, particularly for companies with diversified operations.

It added that strengthening the capacity of NCLT and NCLAT would be crucial to translating these reforms into faster, more effective resolutions.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

S
Sarah B
ICRA makes a valid point. The real estate sector's unique challenges—like multiple allottees per project and incomplete assets—require a tailored resolution mechanism. A one-size-fits-all IBC process just doesn't work here. Hope the policymakers are listening. 🤞
R
Rohit P
The real issue is the NCLT backlog. 30,000 pending cases! How can any amendment work if the tribunals are overburdened? Strengthening NCLT/NCLAT capacity should have been the first priority. Everything else is secondary without a functional judiciary.
P
Priya S
On one hand, it's good that recovery rates are better than other mechanisms. But 32% recovery and timelines exceeding 270 days is still not acceptable for a country aiming for 'ease of doing business'. We need faster resolutions to boost investor confidence.
M
Michael C
As an observer, I think the proposed changes like group insolvency and cross-border provisions are progressive and will help complex corporate groups. It's a step-by-step process. Maybe real estate needs a separate, parallel framework altogether given its social impact.
K
Kavya N
Absolutely correct analysis by ICRA. The middle class has put their life savings into homes. When projects stall, it's not just a financial loss, it's an emotional trauma. The government must bring a special window for real estate under IBC. Jai Hind! 🇮🇳

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50