550

Liberty by withdrawing the restoration application cannot be treated to be liberty to file fresh application under Section 94(1) of IBC – Gursev Singh, Personal Guarantor Vs. IDBI Bank and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

In this case, Personal Guarantor filed an application under Section 94 of the IBC. Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application for non-compliance after granting several opportunities to Personal Guarantor to comply the provisions of Section 94(4) and 94(5) of the IBC.

Thereafter, Personal Guarantor filed an IA for recall and restoration of the application. The AA permitted to withdraw with liberty to re-file as per law as prayed.
Thereafter, Personal Guarantor filed a fresh application under Section 94 which was dismissed as not maintainable.

Hon’ble NCLAT held that no liberty to file fresh petition was granted when order was passed under Sec. 94. At a time of withdrawal of IA only liberty was granted to re-file as per law. Liberty by withdrawing the restoration application cannot be treated to be liberty to file fresh application under Section 94(1) wiping out the earlier order. The 1st order dismissing Section 94 application for reasons stares in the face of the Appellant which order has neither been modified nor appealed.

Liberty by withdrawing the restoration application cannot be treated to be liberty to file fresh application under Section 94(1) of IBC – Gursev Singh, Personal Guarantor Vs. IDBI Bank and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Provisions of CIRP Regulation 36A(4A), the invitation for expression of interest(EOI), which has already been issued can be modified only once will not be applicable to the case dealing with the fresh publication of Form G – Anurag Verma, Resolution Professional – NCLT Chandigarh Bench

The Adjudicating Authority held that in the present case, the modifications as outlined in para 4 above are not minor modifications, but are quite substantial and change the nature of Form G. Keeping in view the ratios of the aforementioned judicial decisions, we are of the view that in the present case, the prayer is for re-publishing of Form G. As per the provisions of Regulation 36A(4A), the invitation for expression of interest, which has already been issued can be modified only once. However, the said provisions will not be applicable to the present case dealing with the fresh publication of Form G. The Resolution Professional is, therefore, to publish fresh Form G with the revised eligibility criteria for invitation of expression of interest from the prospective Resolution Applicant.

Provisions of CIRP Regulation 36A(4A), the invitation for expression of interest(EOI), which has already been issued can be modified only once will not be applicable to the case dealing with the fresh publication of Form G – Anurag Verma, Resolution Professional – NCLT Chandigarh Bench Read Post »

Whether Redeemable Non-Convertible Debentures Subscription Agreement and the Debenture Trust Deed can be relied upon as valid legal documents, since they are insufficiently stamped as required under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, while considering the section 7 application under IBC – Mr. Praful Nanji Satra Vs. Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

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

Whether Redeemable Non-Convertible Debentures Subscription Agreement and the Debenture Trust Deed can be relied upon as valid legal documents, since they are insufficiently stamped as required under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, while considering the section 7 application under IBC – Mr. Praful Nanji Satra Vs. Vistra ITCL (India) Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top