Vipul Ltd. Vs. Payal Jain & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi
Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to […]
Vipul Ltd. Vs. Payal Jain & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »
Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to […]
Vipul Ltd. Vs. Payal Jain & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »
Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to
NCLAT held that in view of the insertion of provisions under explanation below Section 7, the Adjudicating Authority is only required to see whether the application u/s 7 has been filed by 100 allottees, who are members of RWA or a 10% of the allottees who are members of the allottees to maintain it. The Adjudicating Authority is required to take into consideration only the Form-1 and the enclosure therein but find out the default, if any and to proceed in accordance with law. Before the admission of the application u/s 7, the Adjudicating Authority has no jurisdiction to direct the Corporate Debtor to deposit any amount to certain corpus or with regard to maintenance which may not be a subject matter of application under Section 7.