312

On the dishonour of cheques issued in the name of Company under CIRP, Directors cannot be said to be in control and management of the affairs of the company and cannot be prosecuted – Varun Vs. Toolika Pandey – Delhi High Court

/ 8 minutes of reading

Hon’ble High Court held that post the issuance of the moratorium, it is the Insolvency Resolution Professional who has the authority to operate the bank accounts of the company, and on the dishonour of the cheques issued in the name of the company under CIRP, the accused persons/directors therein cannot be said to be in control and management of the affairs of the company, and, therefore, cannot be prosecuted.

On the dishonour of cheques issued in the name of Company under CIRP, Directors cannot be said to be in control and management of the affairs of the company and cannot be prosecuted – Varun Vs. Toolika Pandey – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Corporate Debtor cannot take any benefit of Criminal Proceedings initiated by filing an application u/s 156 of CrPC which were initiated subsequent to receipt of Demand Notice u/s 8 of IBC – Subhash Chand Gupta Vs. Bhavesh Texo Fab Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

/ 12 minutes of reading

An application under Section 9 of IBC filed by the Operational Creditor has been admitted. A Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor has filed this appeal.
NCLAT held that appellant cannot take any benefit of Criminal Proceedings initiated by the Appellant by filing an Application under Section 156 of the Cr. PC which proceedings were initiated subsequent to receipt of Demand Notice. Application under Section 9 was to be considered and decided on the basis of material which was brought by the Operational Creditor with regard to its debt and default and the Adjudicating Authority being satisfied that there is debt which remained unpaid, no error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority in admitting Section 9 Application.

Corporate Debtor cannot take any benefit of Criminal Proceedings initiated by filing an application u/s 156 of CrPC which were initiated subsequent to receipt of Demand Notice u/s 8 of IBC – Subhash Chand Gupta Vs. Bhavesh Texo Fab Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

A plain reading of Section 21 of Arbitration Act does not even remotely suggests that the nature of dispute has to be enumerated or explained in the notice so issued seeking for the dispute being referred to arbitral tribunal – Hemlata Jain Vs. Padmavati Analkumar Mishra – Gujarat High Court

/ 8 minutes of reading

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here

A plain reading of Section 21 of Arbitration Act does not even remotely suggests that the nature of dispute has to be enumerated or explained in the notice so issued seeking for the dispute being referred to arbitral tribunal – Hemlata Jain Vs. Padmavati Analkumar Mishra – Gujarat High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top