Whether the applicant can be permitted to adduce evidence to support the ground relating to Public Policy in an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996? – M/s Alpine Housing Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ashok S. Dhariwal and Others – Supreme Court

In case you've already logged in, click here to know why you're not able to access this content.

 

Avoidance applications under IBC can be heard after conclusion of CIRP and benefits derived from adjudication will be appropriated by Creditors and Resolution Professional will pursue the avoidance applications since he is only functus officio vis-à-vis CIRP and not avoidance applications – Tata Steel BSL Ltd. Vs. Venus Recruiterprivate Ltd. & Ors – Delhi High Court

In case you've already logged in, click here to know why you're not able to access this content.

 

A debt which arises out of advance payment made to a corporate debtor for supply of goods or services would be considered as an operational debt and limitation does not commence when the debt becomes due but only when a default occurs – Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. Vs. Hitro Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. – Supreme Court

In case you've already logged in, click here to know why you're not able to access this content.

 

When an Application under Section 7 of IBC cannot be entertained for a debt, which is barred by time and is liable to be rejected, any addition in the claim, which may fall into the category of time barred debt, also cannot be entertained – Ome Prakash Verma (Suspended Director of Neesa Leisure Ltd.) Vs. Amit Jain, (RP of Neesa Leisure Ltd.) – NCLAT New Delhi

In case you've already logged in, click here to know why you're not able to access this content.