It is ultra vires the IBC to invoke the provisions of the Companies Act, in the absence of any specific provision in the Code or Rules permitting such invocation – Ashok Velamur Seshadri, Liquidator of M/s. Archana Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shibu Job Cheeran Suspended Managing Director of Archana Motors Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Kochi Bench

In this case, the Petition is filed by the Liquidator as an Execution Application under Section 424 (3) of Companies Act, 2013 R/w Rule 56 of NCLT Rules, 2016. The Applicant filed the petition under Companies Act, 2013, R/w Rule 56 of NCLT Rules, 2016, to execute the order passed under Sec. 66, IBC. Time and again it is held that IBC is a self-contained code with objective to maximise value in a timely manner. When the Code provides certain mode for execution of orders it is unnecessary to proceed under the different Act. In fact, it is ultra vires the IBC to invoke the provisions of the Companies Act, in the absence of any specific provision in the Code or Rules permitting such invocation.

It is ultra vires the IBC to invoke the provisions of the Companies Act, in the absence of any specific provision in the Code or Rules permitting such invocation – Ashok Velamur Seshadri, Liquidator of M/s. Archana Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shibu Job Cheeran Suspended Managing Director of Archana Motors Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Kochi Bench Read Post »