Registered Valuers

What is a Registered Valuer

A Registered Valuer (RV) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is a certified professional approved by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) who calculates how much a company’s assets are worth during insolvency. They provide the fair value (the actual market value) and the liquidation value (the amount likely to be recovered if the company shuts down). This helps the Resolution Professional (RP) and the Committee of Creditors (CoC) decide whether the company should be rescued or liquidated.

Official Definitions of Registered Valuers

As Defined in Legislation

Provisions regarding qualification and functions

Companies Act, 2013

Section 247 legally mandates that valuations under company law must be carried out only by a “registered valuer” and sets standards of diligence and liability.

• Valuation required under the Companies Act (e.g., shares, assets, securities, goodwill, liabilities) must be conducted by a person who is qualified and registered as a valuer.
• The valuer must meet qualifications and experience as prescribed by the Rules.
• The valuer must perform the valuation with due diligence.
• Penalties apply for misstatement or fraudulent valuation.

Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017

These Rules create the entire framework of who can be a Registered Valuer, how they are trained, examined, registered, and regulated by IBBI. They:

• Provide the official definition: a Registered Valuer is a person registered with IBBI under these Rules.
• Lay down eligibility criteria (education, experience, membership of an RVO).
• Require passing the IBBI Valuation Examination.
• Specify three asset classes: 1. Land & Building 2.Plant & Machinery 3. Securities or Financial Assets
• Regulate valuation standards, disciplinary actions, and renewal/suspension.
• Establish Registered Valuers Organisations (RVOs) to train, monitor, and regulate valuers.

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016

IBC relies on the RV framework created under the Companies Act and the 2017 Rules; it does not separately define RV.

• The IBC text itself does not define a Registered Valuer.
• However, it requires valuations in insolvency processes to be carried out as per IBBI regulations, which mandate using RVs registered under the Companies Valuers Rules.

IBBI (CIRP) Regulations, 2016

These regulations apply during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

Regulation 35 – Fair Value & Liquidation Value

• Registered Valuers determine:
• Fair Value of the corporate debtor
• Liquidation Value of the corporate debtor
• Values are used by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) for evaluating resolution plans.

Provisions regarding appointments

IBBI (CIRP) Regulations, 2016

These regulations apply during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Under IBC, two RVs must be appointed to determine fair and liquidation value, which guide key decisions in the insolvency process.

Regulation 27 – Appointment

• The Interim/Resolution Professional must appoint two Registered Valuers.
• They must be independent and free of conflicts.

As defined in other Government Reports

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), Need for Uniform Valuation Standards (2020)

The IBBI report highlights the critical role of Registered Valuers (RVs) in ensuring transparent, reliable, and consistent valuation practices across India’s financial and regulatory systems. It notes that valuation significantly influences creditor recoveries, market confidence, and decision-making in insolvency and restructuring, yet the absence of uniform standards has led to wide variability in valuation outcomes. Despite the introduction of the RV framework under the Companies Act and its adoption in the IBC, valuation practices remain fragmented, with different methods and assumptions being used depending on the context. The report argues that RVs must operate under a unified, well-regulated professional architecture supported by high-quality valuation standards, comprehensive documentation and disclosure requirements, and strong oversight and accountability mechanisms. Such reforms, the report suggests, will enhance the credibility of RVs, reduce disputes over valuation figures, and ensure that the profession plays its intended role in safeguarding stakeholder interests and strengthening India’s insolvency and financial markets.

Case Law that Engages with the term 'Register Valuer'

Case that discussed Registered Valuer Fee Entitlement

Alok Kaushik vs Bhuvaneshwari Ramanathan & Ors

In Alok Kaushik vs. Bhuvaneshwari Ramanathan and Others, the dispute arose after Alok Kaushik, appointed as a Registered Valuer during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), sought payment of his fees even though the CIRP was later set aside. The Committee of Creditors had approved his fee, but the question before the courts was whether the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) retained jurisdiction to determine a valuer’s entitlement once the CIRP itself had been cancelled. The Supreme Court held that the NCLT does have jurisdiction under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code to decide on a valuer’s claim as part of insolvency resolution process costs, regardless of whether the CIRP is subsequently annulled. The Court remitted the matter back to the NCLT for quantifying the amount payable.

Case that discussed CoC Commercial Wisdom vs. Judicial Review

Maharashtra Seamless Limited vs. Padmanabhan Venkatesh and Others

In Maharashtra Seamless Limited vs. Padmanabhan Venkatesh and Others, the issue arose because the valuation conducted by the two Registered Valuers placed the liquidation value of the corporate debtor significantly higher than the amount offered in the approved resolution plan. The discrepancy led to a challenge before the appellate authority, which initially held that the plan should match or exceed the liquidation value determined by the valuers. However, the Supreme Court clarified that the valuation by Registered Valuers is only a guiding tool for the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and not a mandatory benchmark that a resolution plan must meet. The Court emphasised that the role of Registered Valuers is to provide an informed estimate of fair and liquidation value, but the commercial decision of the CoC is paramount and cannot be overridden solely because a bid is lower than the valuation figures.

Case that discussed Qualification & Eligibility Regulations

Cushman and Wakefield India Private Limited and Others vs. Union of India and Others

In Cushman and Wakefield India Private Limited and Others vs. Union of India and Others, the petitioners—professional valuation firms—challenged the requirement under the Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017 that only individuals, and not companies or firms without registered valuer status, could sign valuation reports under the Companies Act. They argued that restricting valuation work to Registered Valuers and excluding large professional firms was arbitrary and violative of their right to practice. The Delhi High Court upheld the Rules, holding that valuation under the Companies Act is a statutorily regulated function, and the government is empowered to prescribe qualifications, standards, and registration requirements. The Court emphasised that the role of a Registered Valuer is a specialised, accountable, and independently regulated professional role that cannot be performed by unregistered entities. It concluded that the Rules ensure quality, uniformity, and accountability in valuations and are constitutionally valid.

Case that discussed 'When to Appoint Third Valuer'

Dr. Vijay Radhakrishnan vs. Bijoy P Pulipra

In the case of Dr. Vijay Radhakrishnan vs. Bijoy P Pulipra (Resolution Professional), the dispute centered on the valuation step in the CIRP of PVS Memorial Hospital Pvt. Ltd.. Two Registered Valuers were appointed and submitted valuation reports which differed by about 15.62% on the land valuation. The appellant doctors argued that this difference required appointment of a third valuer under Regulation 35 of the CIRP Regulations. The NCLAT held that the variation was not “material or significant” and therefore did not compel a third valuation; it reinforced that valuation reports by Registered Valuers serve as guiding estimates for the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and are not binding. Further, the tribunal emphasised that it could not substitute its commercial judgment for that of the CoC, provided the valuation process under the Code and Regulations was duly complied with.

Types of Registered Valuers

Types based on Asset Class

The following classification comes from Rule 4 of the Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017

Asset Class	Eligibility (Qualifications)	Experience Required
Plant & Machinery	(i) Graduate in Mechanical, Electrical, Electronic & Communication, Electronic & Instrumentation, Production, Chemical, Textiles, Leather, Metallurgy, or Aeronautical Engineering, or Graduate in Valuation of Plant & Machinery or equivalent. (ii) Post-Graduate in the above courses.	(i) Five years (ii) Three years
Land & Building	(i) Graduate in Civil Engineering, Architecture, or Town Planning or equivalent.(ii) Post-Graduate in the above courses and also in Valuation of Land & Building or Real Estate Valuation.	(i) Five years(ii) Three years
Securities or Financial Assets	(i) Member of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India / Institute of Company Secretaries of India / Institute of Cost Accountants of India / MBA or Post Graduate Diploma in Business Management (specialisation in finance).(ii) Post-Graduate in Finance.	Three years

Note: Along with corresponding qualifications and experience in accordance with Rule 4 as may be specified by the Central Government. (Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India)

Individuals and Valuer Entities

Under Rule 3 & Rule 12 of the Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017:

• Both individuals and partnership entities can be recognised as Registered Valuers.
• Entities must satisfy additional structural and compliance requirements.

Type	Meaning	Key Requirements
Individual Registered Valuer	A single person registered with IBBI to carry out valuations in one or more asset classes.	Must meet education + experience criteria, complete 50-hour RVO course, pass IBBI valuation exam, and be a member of an RVO.
Registered Valuer Entity	A partnership firm, LLP, or company registered with IBBI to act as a valuer.	Majority of partners/directors must be RVs; must have at least three registered valuers in the same asset class; governance + fit and proper criteria.

Appearance of Register Valuer in Official Databases

Official Database maintained by Government

Public Registry by IBBI

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) maintains a public registry of Registered Valuers (RVs) — both individuals and entities. This registry includes essential details such as each RV’s registration number, name, asset class in which they are registered (for example, Land & Building; Plant & Machinery; Securities or Financial Assets), status (active/suspended), and whether they are an individual valuer or a valuer entity. The data ensures transparency, helping resolution professionals, creditors and other stakeholders verify whether a valuer is legitimately registered and eligible to perform valuation assignments under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and related valuation rules.

Research engaging with 'Registered Valuers'

'Institutionalising Valuation Profession in India', Akash Chandra Jauhari and Manmayi Sharma

The report Institutionalising Valuation Profession in India examines the fragmented and inconsistently regulated structure of the valuation profession in India, noting that valuation plays a critical role across insolvency, corporate restructuring, taxation, lending, and financial reporting. While the introduction of the Registered Valuer regime under the Companies Act, 2013 and its adoption under the IBC has improved accountability, the framework remains only a partial solution. The report highlights challenges such as limited coverage across laws, inconsistency in valuation standards, shortage of qualified valuers, and limited institutional oversight. To address these gaps, the report recommends creating a unified regulatory architecture through a dedicated statutory body—such as a National Institute of Valuers—supported by a comprehensive legal framework governing valuers across all asset classes and sectors. It further advocates for standardised valuation methodologies, enhanced professional training and certification, peer review and disciplinary mechanisms, and expansion of regulatory oversight to ensure credibility, transparency, and professionalisation of valuation services in India.

'A critical analysis onto the conundrum of valuation of IP assets as part of liquidation process under IBC, 2016', Shaji, A & Shilpa, M.

This study critically examines the valuation of Intellectual Property (IP) assets during the liquidation process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, emphasizing its profound impact on creditor recovery and the efficiency of insolvency proceedings. The study also scrutinizes the regulatory framework and the pivotal role of registered valuers in ensuring transparent and equitable asset valuation. The paper argues that the meticulous calculation of discount rates and adherence to standardized valuation practices can significantly enhance the credibility of the insolvency process, attract more substantial investments, and ultimately lead to superior financial recoveries.

International Experiences

International Valuation Standards (IVS)

The International Valuation Standards (IVS) are issued by the International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC), an independent global organisation responsible for setting professional valuation standards. The IVSC is a non-governmental body supported by a wide membership network of professional institutions and sponsors across 141 jurisdictions. The current framework, known as IVS 2017, is structured into two components: (i) General Standards (IVS 101–105), which establish core principles applicable to valuation of all asset types, and (ii) Asset Standards (IVS 200–500), which provide guidance tailored to specific classes of assets.

Several countries have formally adopted the International Valuation Standards (IVS) as their national standards, including Romania, South Africa, Turkey, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain, Dubai, and the Philippines. In jurisdictions such as Australia and New Zealand, IVS has been adopted with jurisdiction-specific modifications to align with domestic legislation. Additionally, in countries like China and Hong Kong, professional organisations have incorporated IVS—either fully or selectively—into their own regulatory frameworks for valuers.

Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), founded in 1868, is an independent professional body operating under a UK Royal Charter. As noted by the organisation, the Charter requires that any significant changes to its constitution or bye-laws must be ratified not only by its members but also by the UK Government through the Privy Council. RICS adopts and applies the International Valuation Standards (IVS) through its Red Book, and actively contributes to the development of IVS as a sponsoring member of the International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC). Under a formal alignment agreement with IVSC, the IVS framework is incorporated into the RICS Red Book to ensure consistency in global valuation practice. RICS plays an important role in promoting and enforcing high professional standards and qualifications in the fields of valuation, real estate, land development, construction, and infrastructure.

Challenges

Though RV Rules mandate compliance with “valuation standards”, there is still considerable discretion in how valuers interpret and apply these standards, especially in hard-to-value or distressed-asset scenarios (e.g. obsolete machinery, intangible assets, contingent liabilities, avoidance transactions). This leads to inconsistent valuations across valuers; in insolvency, this may cause wide variance between “fair value” and “liquidation value,” undermining trust in the valuation exercise.

Way forward

While the Registered Valuer regime has strengthened accountability in valuation activities—particularly in corporate and insolvency contexts—the system still operates within a fragmented legal and institutional framework. Strengthening this profession requires a unified approach across all sectors that rely on valuation services. Suggested reforms include creating a dedicated statutory body to regulate and develop the profession, adopting uniform valuation standards and reporting practices, and instituting stronger peer-review and disciplinary mechanisms to enhance consistency and integrity in valuation outputs. Additionally, expanding the pool of trained valuers and improving professional capacity through structured education, certification, and continuous learning would ensure that valuation practices remain credible and responsive to growing economic and regulatory demands. These reforms aim to consolidate valuation as a specialized and independent profession that upholds transparency and confidence in financial decision-making.