Categories
News & Updates

Regulatory Transformation of the External Commercial Borrowings Framework: A Comparative Analysis

On February 16, 2026, the Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”) notified the Foreign Exchange Management (Borrowing and Lending) (First Amendment) Regulations, 2026 (“ECB Regulations 2026”) easing out the process of External Commercial Borrowings (“ECB”). This ECB Regulations 2026 amendment represents a fundamental shift in India’s cross-border debt policy, transitioning from an administrative, approval-heavy system to a principle-based architecture. The revised ECB Regulations 2026 framework codifies key ECB provisions directly into the principal regulations, superseding substantial portions of the Foreign Exchange Management (Borrowing and Lending) Regulations, 2018 (“Principal Regulation”) to enhance legal certainty and ease of doing business.

  • Structural and Regulatory Shift

The ECB Regulations 2026 consolidates the ECB regulatory landscape by substituting Schedule I of the Principal Regulation. This move effectively combines the operational rules that were previously contained in master directions and FAQs, which have now been largely deleted. Key structural changes include:

Principle-Based Oversight: Regulatory oversight have now been shifted from rigid pricing and maturity tracks toward market-linked determination.

Arm’s Length Mandate: Introduction of a strict ‘arm’s length’ requirement for all related-party transactions to prevent tax erosion and circular financing.

Prospective Application: The new substantive conditions apply to ECBs for which a Loan Registration Number (LRN) is obtained on or after February 16, 2026, while existing ECBs follow earlier substantive rules but must adhere to new reporting norms.

  • Comparative Study: Earlier Regime vs. Revised Regime

The following table and analysis highlight the primary shifts in the regulatory requirements for Indian borrowers accessing global debt.

ParameterEarlier RegimeRevised Regime (ECB Regulations 2026)
Eligible BorrowersLimited to FDI-eligible entities, Port Trusts, and SEZ units.Any resident entity (except individuals) registered under Central/State Acts; including Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs).
Recognized LendersLenders had to be from FATF or IOSCO compliant jurisdictions.Any person resident outside India; includes IFSC-based institutions and Indian bank branches.
Borrowing LimitUSD 750 (seven hundred and fifty) million per financial year under the automatic route.Higher of (i) USD 1 (one) billion aggregate outstanding or (ii) 300% (three hundred percent) of standalone net worth as per last audited balance sheet.   Further, the abovementioned borrowing limits shall not be applicable to eligible borrowers that are regulated by financial sector regulators.
Pricing (FCY)Capped at Benchmark + 500 (five hundred) bps (All-in-cost ceiling).Liberalized; market-linked pricing with no regulatory caps.
Maturity Minimum Average Maturity Period (“MAMP”)Multi-tiered (3, 5, 7, or 10 years) based on specific end-use linkages.Standardized 3 (three) year MAMP for almost all categories. Eligible borrowers in manufacturing sector may raise ECB with average maturity between 1 year and 3 years provided the outstanding amounts of ECB shall not exceed USD 150 Million.
End-Use (M&A)Strict prohibition on using ECB for domestic equity / acquisition financing.Expressly permitted for acquisition of control in strategic domestic M&A.
Security CreationRequired ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) from AD Bank.AD Bank NOC removed; governed by commercial agreement between parties.
  • Strategic Liberalization of End-Use and Commercials

Acquisition Financing and Strategic Corporate Actions: For the first time, ECB proceeds can fund the acquisition of control in both listed and unlisted Indian targets. This also extends to schemes of arrangement, such as mergers and demergers. This liberalization is expected to significantly increase the use of the ECB route for leveraged buyouts and cross-border strategic investments.

Real Estate and Agriculture Carve-outs: While real estate business remains on the restricted list, the ECB Regulations 2026 provides precise exclusions. Activities such as industrial parks, SEZs, integrated townships, and construction-development projects are now expressly permitted subject to applicable conditions. Similarly, limited agricultural activities under ‘controlled conditions’ (e.g., for tea, coffee, and rubber) are now eligible for ECB funding.

Manufacturing Sector Benefits: The manufacturing sector retains a specialized window, allowing firms to raise up to USD 150 (one hundred and fifty) million with a shorter MAMP of 1 (one) to 3 (three) years. This provides necessary liquidity for working capital and production-linked expansions without the previous 10 (ten) year tenor requirement.

  • Operational and Compliance Reforms

The RBI has significantly reduced administrative friction:

Cashflow-Based Reporting: Form ECB-2 reporting has shifted from a mandatory monthly filing to an event-based or cashflow-based model. Borrowers now only need to report when they receive proceeds or service debt.

Delegated Authority: AD Banks no longer need to verify market cost alignment for most transactions, as pricing is now commercially determined.

Late Submission Fee (LSF): To maintain reporting discipline, a standardized LSF has been introduced for delayed filings, as per the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank in this regard after completing the reporting.

  • Conclusion

The ECB Regulations 2026 is a landmark reform that integrates India more deeply into global capital markets. By standardizing maturities, removing pricing caps, and enabling acquisition financing, the RBI has provided Indian corporates with a more versatile and efficient financing tool. The emphasis has shifted from micro-management of individual loans to macro-prudential monitoring through a streamlined, digital reporting ecosystem.

Categories
News & Updates

Beware: Posting Online Content

Effective February 20, 2026, any harmful or unlawful synthetically generated information posted online will attract penalty under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026 (“Rules“). “Synthetically generated information,” (“SGI”) shall include audio, visual, or audiovisual content created or altered with computer resources in a way that looks real or indistinguishable from reality. The Rules show the government’s aim to control new technologies like deepfakes and AI-generated media while allowing for exceptions for basic editing, formatting, or improvements for accessibility.

Under the Rules, SGI is explicitly recognized as “information” when it is used for illegal purposes. Intermediaries are now required to deploy reasonable and appropriate technical measures, including automated tools and other suitable mechanisms, to prevent, detect, label, and where necessary, disable access to unlawful SGI. Any person generating, creating, modifying, or disseminating harmful or unlawful SGI shall be liable for appropriate punishment in accordance with the provisions of the Act and any other applicable laws in force.

The Rules also tighten compliance timelines. For instance, intermediaries are now required to respond to specific takedown requests within three hours, instead of thirty-six hours. The time for addressing user grievances has also been reduced from fifteen days to seven days. Moreover, intermediaries that allow the creation or sharing of SGI must make users aware of the legal consequences of misuse, at least once every three months. 

Finally, the Rules mandate intermediaries to ensure that any SGI created, generated, modified, or altered using a computer resource, must be clearly and prominently disclosed as such. Such content must carry a visible label in the case of visual material, ensuring that the disclosure is easily noticeable and adequately perceivable to users. In the case of audio content, a clear and prominently prefixed audio disclosure must be provided so that listeners can immediately identify the content as synthetically generated.

Additionally, the intermediaries shall adopt appropriate technical mechanisms, to the extent of technical feasibility, including the use of a unique identifier. This is to ensure traceability of the computer resource used to create, generate, modify, or alter any content. Together, these amendments represent a crucial regulatory move to tackle the risks posed by AI-driven content manipulation, balancing innovation with accountability and user protection.

Categories
News & Updates

India’s New Startup Recognition Regime: Special Focus on Deep Tech Startups

Introduction

The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has issued a notification dated February 4, 2026 (“Notification”), in supersession of Gazette Notification No. G.S.R. 127(E) dated February 19, 2019, revising the framework for recognition of Startups and introducing specific provisions for Deep Tech Startups.

Overview of Startup and Deep Tech Startup Framework

A “Startup” means an entity, which is incorporated or registered in India as a private limited company, or a partnership firm, or a limited liability partnership, or a multi-state cooperative society registered with the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, or a cooperative society registered under any State or Union Territory Cooperative Societies Act, additionally it should be within ten years of its incorporation, with turnover not exceeding INR 200 crore, engaged in innovation or operating a scalable business model with employment or wealth creation potential.

The Notification expanded the startup definition to include “Deep Tech Startup”, which is focused on advanced scientific or engineering innovation, with high proportion of expenditure on research and development (R&D), creation of significant and novel intellectual property (IP), and longer development timelines. For entities recognized as Deep Tech Startups: (a) the eligibility period is extended to twenty (20) years from the date of incorporation or registration; and (b) the turnover threshold is increased to INR 300 crore in any of the financial years since incorporation or registration.

Further, the Notification mandates that Startups, including a Deep Tech Startup deploy funds primarily for core business and innovation activities, and restricts investments in real estate, loans, securities, luxury assets, and other speculative or non-productive activities, except in the ordinary course of business.

Conclusion

The Notification broadens the definition of Startups but also recognizes Deep Tech Startups, providing them extended timelines and higher turnover limits by doing so, it fosters innovation, R&D, and the creation of intellectual property. The Notification strengthens the startup ecosystem and promotes sustainable, technology driven growth in India.

Categories
Articles News & Updates

COMPARATIVE NOTE – LABOUR LAW CODES

On November 21, 2025, India implemented four new Labour Codes: Code on Wages, 2019 Industrial Relations Code, 2020 Code on Social Security, 2020 Occupational Safety, Health & Working Conditions (OSHWC) Code, 2020. These four codes now replace 29 older central labour laws and are in effect from November 21, 2025.

A comparative analysis of each code, along with the changes, is detailed hereinbelow:

1. CODE ON WAGES, 2019

Amalgamates, simplifies and rationalises the relevant provisions of the following four central labour enactments relating to wages, namely— (a) the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (repealed); (b) the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (repealed); (c) the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 (repealed); and (d) the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 (repealed).

The particulars and highlights of the code are as follows:

Wage Definition

  • Provision under current laws – There were different definitions of wages across laws.
  • Provision under the Code- Single definition of wages applicable for PF, bonus, gratuity, maternity benefit, employee state insurance etc. 

Action Point – Employers must ensure and consider this definition of wage for calculation of wages for the employees.

Applicability of Minimum Wage

  • Provision under current laws – Minimum wages were applied to certain type of employments as categorized under the schedule of Minimum Wages Act, 1948. 
  • Provision under the Code- Applies to all employees without any categorization specified. For the purpose of this code:

“Employee” includes any person who has been employed on wages to do any skilled, semi-skilled or unskilled, manual, operational, supervisory, managerial, administrative, technical or clerical work for hire or reward.

“Employer” means a person who employs, whether directly or through any person, or on his behalf or on behalf of any person, one or more employees in his establishment.

Action point – Employers to ensure all employees are paid minimum wages as per the notification of the government.

National Floor Wage   

  • Provision under current laws – No minimum floor wages were set by the central government under Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The minimum wages were set by state governments in their sole discretion.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 9 -The concept of floor wages has been introduced wherein the Central government will set a national minimum wage taking into account the minimum standard of living of workers, which will be standard for all states. The State government cannot fix wages below such amount prescribed by the central government.

Equality for all genders          

  • Provision under current laws – Recognized equal pay for opposite genders i.e. male and female and prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender during recruitment for same or work of similar nature.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 3- Recognizes equality amongst genders and prohibits discrimination on grounds of sex during recruitment for same or work of similar nature.

Wage period and time limit for payment 

  • Provision under current laws- The time frame for payment of wages was calculated based on the number of employees in the establishment i.e. in any factory industrial or other establishment in which less than one thousand persons are employed, the wages were to be paid before the expiry of the seventh day. However, in other establishments the wages shall be paid before the expiry of the tenth day.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 17- Under the new code, the employer shall fix the wage period for employees either as daily or weekly or fortnightly or monthly. The time limit for payment for employees falling under each such category has been provided for in the code i.e. (i) for employees engaged on daily basis – at the end of the shift; (ii) for employees engaged on weekly basis- on last working day of the week; (iii) Fortnightly basis – before expiry of the seventh day after end of the fortnight; (iv) monthly basis – before the expiry of the seventh day of the succeeding month.

Action Point – Employers to adjust payment timelines in accordance with the timelines mentioned in the act to avoid penalties.

Wages for Overtime Work    

  • Provision under current laws- Employee works overtime i.e. in excess of the number of hours constituting a normal working day, employer to pay for every hour or part of an hour of excess hour at the rate fixed under this act or by state government.          
  • Provision under the Code- Section 14- For every hour or part of hour of overtime, the employer shall pay him for every hour or for part of an hour so worked in excess, at the overtime rate which shall not be less than twice the normal rate of wages.

Action Point –Employers to ensure that their internal overtime policy provides for payment at the rate that is equal to or more than twice the normal rate of wage.

Payment after Termination and Resignation       

  • Provision under current laws- The employer shall pay the due wages within 2 working days from the day his employment is terminated.   
  • Provision under the Code- Section 17- Now this timeline will apply in cases of resignation as well. The State government can provide other time limit.
  • Action point – The language of the provision is directive and does not provide carve out for timelines specified under specific contracts. Employers to ensure compliance unless state governments by notification provide for any other timeline.

Mode of Payment of Wages

  • Provision under current laws- All wages shall be paid in current coin or currency notes or by cheque or by crediting the wages in the bank account of the employee.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 15- Explicitly recognizes electronic payments as a mode of payment of wages.

Deductions from Wages        

  • Provision under current laws- The total deductions which may be made under section 7 of payment of wages act 1936, in any wage-period from the wages of any employed person shall not exceed 75% in case of deduction made to cooperative societies and shall not exceed 50% of such wages in other case.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 18 (sub-section 3) – The ceiling for cooperative societies has been removed, and it has been clarified that in no case deductions from the wages exceed 50% of such wages. As the definition of wages now clarifies wages to include basic pay, dearness allowance, and retaining allowance, the components other that these shall at all times be less or equal to 50% of the wages.

Action Point– Employers to restructure the salary packages of employees to in accordance with the new wages definition and ensure that other components of the salary does not cross the mark of 50% of the total CTC.

Disqualification for Bonus     

  • Provision under current laws- An employee shall be disqualified from receiving bonus under this Code, if he is dismissed from service for— (a) fraud; or (b) riotous or violent behaviour while on the premises of the establishment; or (c) theft, misappropriation or sabotage of any property of the establishment.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 29 – Conviction for sexual harassment has been added as the fourth ground.

Action Point – Employers to include disqualification for bonus on grounds of conviction for sexual harassment in relevant policies.

Claim Period      

  • Provision under current laws- Under Payment of Wages Act, 1936 claims in relation to unlawful deductions could be filed within 12 months from the date of the deduction. However, application may be admitted after the said period of twelve months if the applicant satisfies the authority that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within such period.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 45- The period of limitation for filing of claims by a worker has been enhanced to 3 years from the date on which such claim arises subject to sufficient cause being shown by the applicant for such delay.

Note – As per 61 of the wages code 2019, the provisions contained in the code have effect notwithstanding inconsistent contained in any other law time being in force or in the terms of any award, agreement, settlement or contract of service. Therefore, the code has an overriding effect.

2. CODE ON SOCIAL SECURITY, 2020 

Consolidates 9 acts particularly (i) Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923; (ii) Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948; (iii) Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (iv) Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959 (v) Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (vi) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (vii) Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981 (viii) Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (ix) Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008.

Status of the laws – All laws that have been consolidated are repealed. However, the Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, the Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976, the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and the Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997 framed or made under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the rules, regulations and schemes made or framed under the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 shall remain in force, to the extent they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Code for a period of one year from the date of commencement of this Code.

Aggregator         

  • Provision under current laws- Not defined.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 2(2) – “aggregator” means a digital intermediary or a marketplace for a buyer or user of a service to connect with the seller or the service provider.

GigWorkers      

  • Provision under current laws- Not defined.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 2(35) – “gig worker” means a person who performs work or participates in a work arrangement and earns from such activities outside of traditional employer-employee relationship.

Contract Labour

  • Provision under current laws- Not defined.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 2(19) – Contract labour” means a worker who is hired through a contractor to work for or in connection with the work of an establishment—even if the principal employer is not aware of the hiring. It also includes inter-State migrant workers supplied by a contractor. However, they are not included within the scope contract labour:

A worker who is a regular, permanent employee of the contractor (not a part-time worker), working for the contractor’s own business, and who receives regular pay increments, social security benefits (like PF, ESI, etc.), and other legally required welfare benefits.

Such a person is treated as the contractor’s own employee, not contract labour for the principal employer.

Employee

  • Provision under current laws- Different under different acts.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 2(26) – The definition of “employee” now includes contract workers.

Action Point– Employers to ensure that workers hired through contractors also receive the same treatment as their other employees.

Platform Work  

  • Provision under current laws- Not defined.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 2(60) – “platform worker” means a work arrangement outside of a traditional employer employee relationship in which organisations or individuals use an online platform to access other organisations or individuals to solve specific problems or to provide specific services or any such other activities which may be notified by the Central Government, in exchange for payment.

         A person engaged in platform work is a “platform worker”.

Fixed Term Employment                    

  • Provision under current laws- Not defined.
  • Provision under the Code- Section 2 (34) – “fixed term employment” means the engagement of an employee on the basis of a written contract of employment for a fixed period: Provided that— (a) his hours of work, wages, allowances and other benefits shall not be less than that of a permanent employee doing the same work or work of a similar nature; and (b) he shall be eligible for all benefits, under any law for the time being in force, available to a permanent employee proportionately according to the period of service rendered by him even if his period of employment does not extend to the required qualifying period of employment.

Action Point – Benefits of fixed term employee to be evaluated and made similar to those of permanent employees.

Registration of an Establishment under the Code         

  • Provision under current laws- Different for different acts.            
  • Provision under the Code– Section 3 – Mandatory registration under the code, however if establishment is already registered under any existing central labour law, it shall not be required to obtain registration again under the Code. Such existing registration shall be deemed to be registration for the purposes of the SS Code.

Action Point – Establishments not already registered to be registered under the new code.

Social Security Schemes for Gig and Platform Workers                  

  • Provision under current laws- No specific schemes were implemented for gig workers and platform workers.     
  • Provision under the Code– Section 114 – Scheme for matters pertaining to (a) life and disability cover; (b) accident insurance; (c) health and maternity benefits; (d) old age protection; (e) crèche; and (f) any other benefit as may be determined by the Central Government.

The scheme may be wholly or partly funded by central government or state government or both, or may be funded entirely by the contributions of the aggregators. For such purpose, the contributions shall be 1%-2% of the annual turnover of the aggregator subject to such contribution not exceeding 5% of the amount paid or payable by an aggregator to gig workers and platform workers.

Action Point – Awaiting rules and more information regarding setting up of the scheme.

ESIC and PF – Voluntary Applicability and Opt Out       

  • Provision under current laws-

ESIC Applicability – It shall apply, in the first instance, to all factories (including factories belonging to the Government other than seasonal factories.

EPF Applicability – to every establishment which is a factory engaged in any industry specified in Schedule I and in which twenty or more persons are employed, and to any other establishment employing twenty or more persons.

  • Provision under the Code

Schedule 1 – Applicability threshold to ESIC- Every establishment in which ten or more persons are employed other than a seasonal factory. However mandatory if even one worker handles hazardous work.

EPF – Every establishment in which twenty or more employees are employed.

Section 1(5) and 1(7) – establishments where the employer and majority of employees agree that the provisions shall apply to such establishment can apply PF and ESI related chapters.

Similarly, Employer can apply to opt out of such voluntary application, if there is an agreement in this respect with majority of employees, complying with applicable conditions imposed by relevant authorities.

Gratuity for fixed term employees

  • Provision under current laws- No provision           
  • Provision under the Code– Section 53- Gratuity to be paid to fixed term employees irrespective of their length of service on pro-rata basis.

Action Point – Employers to gratuity benefits to fixed term employees and ensure change in establishment’s policy. 

3. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY, HEALTH AND WORKING CONDITIONS CODE, 2020

Consolidates 13 acts including but not limited to the Factories Act, 1948; The Plantations Labour Act, 1951; The Mines Act, 1952; The Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961; The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970; 9. The Sales Promotion Employees (Condition of Service) Act, 1976.

     Status of the consolidated laws – All laws that have been consolidated are repealed.

Definition of Establishment  

  • Provision under current laws- Different under different laws.
  • Provision under the Code– Section 2(v) – “establishment” means a place where any industry, trade, business, manufacturing or occupation is carried on in which ten or more workers are employed.

Definition of Workers

  • Provision under current laws- Different under different laws.
  • Provision under the Code– However, under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970, the definition excluded such person, being employed in a supervisory capacity draws wages exceeding five hundred rupees per month.     Section (zl) – A person employed in any establishment to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical, or supervisory work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied. The definition excludes the following:

(i)      Employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity;

(ii)     Employed in a supervisory capacity drawing wage exceeding INR 18,000 per month or an amount as may be notified by the Central Government from time to time.

Action Point – Applicability to extend to such workers who earn less than 18,000 if employed in a supervisory capacity.

Definition of Factory   

  • Provision under current laws- Under Factories Act, 1948, “factory” included a precinct wherein a manufacturing process is carried on and which engages (i) ten or more workers in the preceding 12 months with the aid of power or (ii) twenty or more workers on any day of the preceding twelve months without the aid of power.         
  • Provision under the Code– Section 2(w) – Under the new code, the thresholds have changed to 20 in case of a precinct wherein manufacturing process is carried with power and 40 in case of a precinct wherein manufacturing process is carried without power respectively.

Contract Labour obligations

  • Provision under current laws- Applicable to establishments, contractors who employ 20 or more workman under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.
  • Provision under the Code– Section 45- Applicable to establishments which employ at least 50 contract labourers in the preceding 12 months. Furthermore, manpower supply contractors who employ at least 50 contract labour in the preceding 12 months will also be covered under relevant provisions.

Please note for the purpose of this code the definition of contract labour is same as that mentioned above in the social security code.

Working hours and other rights of workers        

  • Provision under current laws- Under the Factories Act, 1948:

a)   No adult worker shall be required or allowed to work in a factory for more than 9 hours in a day.

b)   No adult worker shall be required or allowed to work in a factory on the first day of the week.

c)   Extra wages for overtime at twice the rate of wages, no consent requirements.

  • Provision under the Code

a)    Section 25- Maximum 8 working hours in a day

b)   Section 26- No worker to be allowed to work more than six days a week.

c)    Section 27- Extra wages for overtime at twice the rate of wages, to be calculated on weekly or daily basis and subject to consent of the worker.

Annual Leave with wages      

  • Provision under current laws- Eligibility – Worker who has worked for 240 days or more in a calendar year.

One day for every twenty days of work performed by him during the previous calendar year.

  • Provision under the Code– Section 32- Eligibility – Worker who has worked for 180 days or more in a calendar year same as before.

Action Point – Leave policies of company to be revised.

Annual leave encashment     

  • Provision under current laws- Leave encashment only in cases of dismissal from service or quits his employment or is superannuated or dies while in service, during the course of the calendar year.     
  • Provision under the Code– Section 32 (ix) – In addition to avail leave encashment in case of dismissal, resignation or death, workers may request leave encashment at the end of each calendar year for any accrued leave exceeding the 30 days carry forward limit.

Night shifts for woman          

  • Provision under current laws- Factories Act, 1948 prohibited engagement of women employees between 7 pm and 6 am.
  • Provision under the Code– Section 43- Women can now be employed, subject to their consent before 6 a.m. and beyond 7 p.m. subject to such conditions relating to safety, holidays and working hours or any other condition to be observed by the employer as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government.

Appointment Letter    

  • Provision under current laws- No provision.
  • Provision under the Code– Section 6- Issue a letter of appointment to every employee on his appointment in the establishment, with such information and in such form as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government and where an employee has not been issued such appointment letter on or before the commencement of this Code, he shall, within three months of such commencement, be issued such appointment letter. 

Safety officers   

  • Provision under current laws- As per the factories Act, 1948, Safety officers were to be appointed in every factory, — wherein one thousand or more workers are ordinarily employed, or (ii) wherein, in the opinion of the State Government, any manufacturing process or operation is carried on, which process or operation involves any risk of bodily injury, poisoning or disease, or any other hazard to health, to the persons employed in the factory.    
  • Provision under the Code– Section 22 – The employer to appoint a safety officer in (a) factory wherein five hundred workers or more; or (b) factory carrying on hazardous process wherein two hundred fifty workers or more; or (c) building or other construction work wherein two hundred fifty workers or more shall appoint safety officers.

4. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS CODE, 2020

Consolidates (i) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ii) Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 and (iii) Trade Unions Act, 1926.

Status of the consolidated laws – All three are repealed.

Grievance redressal committee

  • Provision under current laws- Every industrial establishment employing twenty or more workmen shall have one or more Grievance Redressal Committee for the resolution of disputes arising out of individual grievances. However, this section was not applicable to the workmen for whom there is an established Grievance Redressal Mechanism in the establishment concerned.
  • Provision under the Code– Section 4- Threshold remains the same however it has become mandatory notwithstanding that Grievance Redressal Mechanism is already established.

Negotiating council for Trade Unions        

  • Provision under current laws- No provision.          
  • Provision under the Code– Section 14 – In case of Industrial establishment having a registered trade union, there shall be negotiating union or council for negotiation purposes, in the event there is only one registered trade union, such union will be the negotiating union. However, in case there are multiple registered trade unions, the code provides for the manner in which the negotiating union shall be recognized.

Standing Orders and concept of deemed certificate    

  • Provision under current laws- Applicable to establishments with 100 or more employees.        
  • Provision under the Code– Section 29 and 30 – Applicable to every industrial establishment having 300 or more employees. Such establishment must draft their Standing Orders within 6 months from the commencement of the code however if such an establishment simply adopts the model standing order issued by the central government, in which case they will be treated as already certified.

Worker’s Reskilling Fund       

  • Provision under current laws- No provision.
  • Provision under the Code– Section 83 – Fund to be set up by appropriate government and the fund shall consist of the contribution of the employer of an industrial establishment an amount equal to fifteen days wages last drawn by the worker immediately before the retrenchment.

The fund shall be utilized by crediting fifteen days wages last drawn by the worker to his account who is retrenched, within forty-five days of such retrenchment, in such manner as may be prescribed.

Categories
News & Updates

Clove Legal has successfully obtained a landmark order from the Hon’ble Bombay High Court directing MahaRERA to implement structured guidelines governing its hearing procedures and functioning framework.

In Mayur Desai v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition (L) No. 11502 of 2025), the Court took cognizance of the procedural inefficiencies and lack of transparency in MahaRERA’s functioning, particularly its continued reliance on virtual-only hearings post-pandemic. Emphasizing that access to justice is a constitutional right, not a technical convenience, the Court issued binding directions to MahaRERA for:

  • Restoration of hybrid hearings (physical + virtual) within 4 (four) weeks;
  • A mechanism for urgent listings and effective execution of orders of MahaRERA;
  • Transparent cause-lists, pronouncement of orders, and grievance redressal processes;
  • Functional and accessible communication channels for litigants and lawyers.

This judgment significantly strengthens procedural equity for homebuyers and stakeholders in the real estate sector. It is a landmark decision that reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to transparency, efficiency, and inclusive access.

We remain committed to championing transparency, access, and procedural integrity across regulatory and judicial platforms.

Click here for detailed Judgement.

Categories
News & Updates

Regulatory Roundup: Key Corporate & Financial Law Updates

  • RBI Introduces Holistic Framework for Digital Lending: RBI (Digital Lending) Directions, 2025

The Reserve Bank of India on May 8, 2025, has unveiled the RBI(Digital Lending) Directions, 2025(“Directions”), establishing a consolidated and enforceable regulatory framework for digital lending in India superseding earlier digital lending guidelines from 2022 and 2023. The Directions unify earlier circulars and aim to curb long-standing challenges such as predatory lending, third-party data misuse, and opaque digital loan practices. The framework applies to all Regulated Entities (“REs”) including Commercial Banks, NBFCs, Co-operative Banks, and All-India Financial Institutions, and lays down strict obligations on their partnerships with Lending Service Providers (“LSPs”) operating through Digital Lending Apps (“DLAs”).

Key borrower-friendly features have been introduced. All lenders must now provide a Key Fact Statement (KFS) highlighting critical loan terms, including the Annual Percentage Rate (APR), which means the total yearly cost of the loan including interest and fees, shown as a percentage and any penalties. Borrowers also benefit from a cooling-off period (minimum one day), during which they may exit a loan without penalty. Loan disbursals must go directly to the borrower’s bank account, and repayments must also be made directly to the lender, no middlemen allowed. In terms of data privacy, DLAs and LSPs may process data overseas, however this is subject to borrower’s consent, but it must be brought back to India within 24 hours and stored permanently on servers located within India. Borrowers have the right to withdraw consent and ask for their data to be deleted.

The Directions place strict responsibility on lenders to oversee their partners. Written contracts, ongoing due diligence, and regular portfolio reviews of LSPs are mandatory. To reduce financial risk, the Default Loss Guarantee (DLG), which is a promise by a third party to cover a portion of the lender’s loss if a borrower doesn’t repay, has been capped at 5% of the loan portfolio and must be invoked within 120 days of default. Importantly, all REs must report their DLAs to the RBI’s Centralised Information Management System (CIMS) by June 15, 2025, with a public directory of DLAs set to go live by July 1, 2025. All existing DLG arrangements must comply with the new rules by November 1, 2025. REs are fully responsible for the actions of their LSPs, and borrowers can raise unresolved complaints to the RBI through its Complaint Management System (CMS). These changes mark a major step toward a fairer, more transparent digital lending landscape in India.

  • SEBI revamps the nomination rules for mutual funds and demat accounts

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) vide a circular dated January 10, 2025, has updated the nomination rules for mutual funds and demat accounts. These revisions aim at preventing the generation of unclaimed assets in the securities market. These revamped rules may be crucial in succession planning if followed diligently by individuals. These rules have come into effect from March 1, 2025.

The SEBI through this circular has reiterated that in case of demise of one or more joint holder(s), the remaining assets shall be transmitted to the surviving holder(s), through the process of deletion of name and the surviving holder(s) shall receive assets not in capacity of a trustee but as owner(s). In case of simultaneous passing away of joint holders the assets shall be transmitted by the regulated entity to the registered nominee(s).

As for the revised norms, SEBI has mandated the investors to provide personal identifiers such as PAN or Driving License number or last 4 digits of Aadhaar along with full contact details, relationship of nominee(s) with investors, and date of birth of nominee(s). To make the process easier the new rules provide the investors an opportunity to nominate up to 10 (ten) persons, which is an increase from the three (3) nominee rules, in the account/folio, however, power of attorney holders of investor cannot utilize the right to nominate.

The rules also provide the nominees in case of a joint account, upon transmission, option to either continue as joint holders with other nominees or opt for a separate single account/folio for their respective portion. The process for transmission to nominees has been laid out and provides that the registered nominees shall provide the Death Certificate of the deceased investor along with updated KYC of the nominee(s). However, it has been clearly stated that the regulated entities shall not ask/seek any other documentation including affidavits, indemnities undertakings, attestations or notarizations from the nominee(s).

The nominees and legal heirs of the deceased investors shall be provided assistance from the regulated entities for transfer of assets of the deceased investor, from the nominee(s) to the legal heirs of such investor. The incapacitated investor who still has the capacity to contract, has an option under the new rules to empower any one of the nominees to operate his account/folio and specify the value of assets in the account/folio that can be encashed by such nominee.

Categories
News & Updates

Bombay High Court reprimands MahaRERA for not holding in-person hearings – Writ Petition filed by Clove Legal on behalf of aggrieved home buyer.

Clove Legal successfully represented a home-buyer in a Writ Petition filed before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, whereby the Hon’ble Court while considering the common grievances of the home-buyers through our client, directed the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) to review its Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and its Rules and Regulations for conducting effective hearing of the cases before the Authority and speedy disposal of the same.

Prior to Covid 19 pandemic, the hearings before MahaRERA were held physically. During Covid 19, the hearings were being held online to keep the legal system still accessible to the parties. However, while all courts and tribunals resumed to physical hearings or hybrid hearings (both physical and virtual), MahaRERA continued to function virtually. This made it difficult for the advocates and parties to approach the authority for an urgent hearing in the matters. Due to such inaccessibility, our client despite of having filed his Complaint in December 2020 obtained the final order in his favour only in November 2022 (after two years). Thereafter, due to non-compliance of the order by the developer, our client then initiated execution proceedings in January 2023 which were deferred for over a period of more than one (1) year until March 2024, when MahaRERA reserved the matter for final order in execution proceedings. However, no final order issuing a recovery warrant was passed for over a year. Hence, the writ petition was filed before the Bombay High Court, whereby the Hon’ble Court was pleased to direct MahaRERA to dispose of the execution proceedings in a time bound manner and further, directed the authority to suggest guidelines to put its own house in order.

Our team comprised of Dharmesh Kotadia, Senior Partner; Chitrangada Singh, Senior Associate and Ayush Yadav, Associate.

Categories
News & Updates

Bombay High Court Clarifies Interplay between Information Technology Act, 2000 and Indian Penal Code 1860, in Cybercrime Cases

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in its latest decision dated April 15, 2024, in the case of Awadhesh Kumar Parasnath Pathak Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. held that while the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”) is a special Act for addressing cybercrimes and has an overriding effect, it does not preclude the application of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) in cases where the offences are not adequately addressed under the IT Act.  

The Court deliberated upon whether actions covered under Section 43 read with Section 66 of the IT Act (Penalty and compensation for damage to computer, computer system, etc.) constitute fraudulent or dishonest behaviour. The Court emphasized that these provisions do not encompass situations where permission to use the computer system is obtained through deception from the custodian of a computer system and further observed that while the IT Act addresses dishonest and fraudulent acts, it lacks explicit provisions regarding deceit which is a crucial element in establishing offences under the IPC.

The case in question before the Court involved an Accused, who was formerly employed as a Technical Manager at Cosmo Films Limited, company. The allegations arose regarding the unauthorized use and dissemination of sensitive business information stored on a company-issued laptop. The Accused faced charges under Sections 408 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC, along with Sections 43(b), 66, and 72 of the IT Act. The Accused approached the court claiming that the sections under IPC could not be invoked as those elements were covered in the sections under the IT Act and therefore, being charged under both the statutes would amount to double jeopardy.   

The court rejected the said contention of the Accused and highlighted that, certain aspects of offences such as cheating and criminal breach of trust as defined by IPC are not entirely covered by the IT Act. Therefore, the IPC provisions can still be invoked even if any element of an offence under the IPC is absent from an act that is punishable under the IT Act. Thus, the court held that the provisions of IPC would still apply if any component necessary for an offence under IPC is missing from the conduct that is an offence under the IT Act.

Categories
News & Updates

Auction Sale Set Aside by DRT Due to Default by the Bank: Supreme Court Enhances Rate of Interest to be Paid by the Bank Along with Refund Amount to the Successful Auction Purchaser | Tenants/Appellants being Successful Bidders Reverted to the Status of Tenants and Protected from Being Dispossessed by the Bank

Relevant Facts:

In the recent case of Govind Kumar Sharma & Anr. versus Bank of Baroda & Ors., the undisputed facts were that the Appellants were tenants in the mortgaged premises which had been put up for auction by the Respondent Bank under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, (“SARFAESI Act”). Appellants’ possession and status as tenants was converted into that of owners after the sale was confirmed and the sale certificate was issued in their favour by the Bank. The Respondent Borrowers admitted that they were in default and that the Bank had a right to recover its dues in accordance with law. After the auction, the Respondent Borrowers deposited the entire outstanding amount independent of the auction money which was additionally lying with the Bank. The Bank admitted that there was non-compliance of the statutory provisions in conducting the auction sale and had conceded before the DRT that the auction sale in question may be set aside and the Bank be granted liberty to proceed afresh under the provisions of SARFAESI Act. The Bank also admitted that the auction money of Rs.12.40 Lakh was lying in a separate fixed deposit and this amount was in addition to the outstanding amount deposited by the Respondent Borrowers after the auction sale. The DRT, after setting aside the auction sale, further directed the Bank to refund the auction money with interest as applicable to fixed deposits only after receiving possession of the property from the Appellant/Auction Purchasers within 15 days thereof. The appeal filed by the Appellant/Auction Purchasers before the DRAT and the Writ Petition filed before the High Court were both dismissed, giving rise to the Appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Findings of the Supreme Court in its judgement dated April 18, 2024:

In view of the above facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held and ordered the following:

  • Since that mandatory notice of 30 days as per the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, was not given by the Bank to the Borrower before holding the auction/sale, the setting aside of the auction/sale by the DRT and affirmed by the DRAT and the High Court was approved/upheld by the Supreme Court.
  • Once the sale is set aside, the status of possession of the Appellant would be altered from that of an owner to that of the tenants and the Bank would not have any right to claim actual physical possession from the Appellants nor the Appellants would be under any obligation to handover physical possession to the Bank. Therefore, the direction issued by the DRT that the Bank will first take possession and thereafter refund the auction money with interest applicable to fixed deposits, was set aside. It was kept open for the Borrower as owner of the property to evict the Appellants in accordance with law.
  • Since the entire controversy had arisen because of the Bank not following the prescribed mandatory procedure for conducting the auction, the Bank was ordered to return the purchase amount to the Appellants and the interest rate was enhanced to 12% per annum compound interest to be calculated from the date of deposit till the date it is actually paid.
Categories
News & Updates

Incorporation of Arbitration Clause by Reference: A General Reference to A Contract Would Not Have the Effect of Incorporating the Arbitration Clause in Another Contract.

The Supreme Court in its recent decision dated March 19, 2024, in NBCC (India) Private Limited v. Zillion Infraprojects Private Limited[1] reaffirmed the position that a dispute cannot be referred to arbitration on the basis of arbitration clause contained in a referred contract unless a specific reference was made in the main contract to incorporate the arbitration clause into the same.

The same was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the backdrop of appeal filed by NBCC (India) Limited against the decision of Delhi High Court which had referred the dispute between the parties to arbitration in absence of specific arbitration clause in the agreement.

Brief background of the Case

A principal contract or Letter of Intent (“LOI“), was executed between the parties containing a clause that the terms and conditions indicated in a former contract (“DVC”) would apply mutatis mutandis to the LOI.  The LOI specified that the disagreement will be resolved in civil court rather than through arbitration whereas, the DVC contained an arbitration clause to resolve the dispute through arbitration.

Issue for Consideration

Whether the arbitration clause of a contract applies ipso facto to another contract, if another contract makes a general reference to the referred contract?

Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that when parties enter into a contract making a general reference to the contract which contains an arbitration clause, such general reference would not have the effect of incorporating the arbitration clause from the referred document into another contract between the parties. It has been held that the arbitration clause from a former/referred contract can be incorporated into another contract (where such reference is made) only by a specific reference to arbitration clause.


[1] 2024 SCC OnLine SC 323