175

[Joint sale of assets of Corporate Debtor and a Third Person/Guarantor] When subsequent E-auction Notice had come into existence then the Appellant is only to assail the subsequent E-auction Notice, if it so desires/advised – Ansio Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Venkat Ram Spinners Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – NCLAT Chennai

In this case, NCLAT pertinently points out, that obviously, the Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Petitioner is not desirous of assailing the subsequent E-auction Notice dated 15.02.2024, (being the later development, after the earlier Auction Notice dated 16.09.2023) and in the absence of any challenge to the subsequent E-auction Notice dated 15.02.2024, then in law, it amounts to waiver, Acquiescence and also Estoppel By Conduct of the Appellant/Petitioner.

[Joint sale of assets of Corporate Debtor and a Third Person/Guarantor] When subsequent E-auction Notice had come into existence then the Appellant is only to assail the subsequent E-auction Notice, if it so desires/advised – Ansio Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Venkat Ram Spinners Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – NCLAT Chennai Read Post »

If an applicant is not in a position to satisfy on the point of just and equitable ground, the tribunal may refuse to make an order for winding up under Section 271(e) of the Companies Act, 2013 – Rajesh Agrawal Vs. Premier Proteins Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT affirmed decision of NCLT and held that sub-section (2) of Section 273 clearly indicates that if such petition is filed i.e. petition filed under Section 271(e) read with Section 272 (1)(b) of the New Act, onus is on the applicant to satisfy that there is just and equitable ground for winding up of a company. Meaning thereby that if an applicant is not in a position to satisfy on the point of just and equitable ground, the tribunal may refuse to make an order for winding up.

If an applicant is not in a position to satisfy on the point of just and equitable ground, the tribunal may refuse to make an order for winding up under Section 271(e) of the Companies Act, 2013 – Rajesh Agrawal Vs. Premier Proteins Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top