More than 2 lakh crore have been filed as 'avoidance transactions' under the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code and are pending with various company law tribunals across the country. Resolution professionals have the ability to reverse any transaction entered by the debtor company before the IBC is invoked if he feels that the transaction was intended to divert funds or alienate assets. Such claims need to be approved by the National Company Law Tribunal NCLT. These clawback provisions aim to target any related party transactions, fund diversions and other corporate actions like sale of assets or mergers that were undertaken with fraudulent motives and money that is clawed back is distributed amongst the lenders of the company. As many as 90% of the total claims filed under avoidance transactions are still pending, the pile-up of caseload in the NCLTs is adversely impacting these cases, according to lawyers. A total of 777 avoidance transactions have been filed and the total value of the claims is 2.2 lakh crore, according to the latest data released by Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India. On March 31,2022, the NCLTs have rendered their verdict only in 71 cases involving an amount of 15,106 crore. The data shows that RPs were able to clawback only 50 crore. Ajay Shaw partner said that avoidance transactions are an important mechanism to make sure that asset stripping is brought back to the corporate debtor for its resolution. The pendency of avoidance transaction claims at NCLTs is not helping in the ultimate clawback where time is not the essence, as it makes it hard for the actual clawback. Legal experts say the procedure to provide an avoidance transaction requires substantial proof and a trail based on evidence that is time consuming. The cases are complicated, where the recipient of the money assets is being probed or bankrupt. In some transactions, the counter party itself is under resolution or liquidation or defunct, adds to the plight, said Babu Sivaprakasam head of banking practice, Economic Laws Practice Entrusting this to a dedicated bench to conduct the matters on a summary trial basis within an identified timeframe, along with the distribution of the amount to be recovered to the creditors post adjustment of costs.