01/05/2024

NCLAT overrules its judgments in Hemang Phophalia and Elektrans Shipping Pte. Ltd. | Restoration of name of Corporate Debtor under Section 248(5) of Companies Act, 2013 cannot be restored automatic as soon as an application is filed under Section 7 or 9 of IBC by a creditor – Fedex Express Transportation and Supply Chain Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Zipker Online Services Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

This important judgment covers: A. Scheme of Removal of Name by RoC under the Companies Act, 2013. B. Is Restoration of name of Corporate Debtor under Section 248(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 restored automatic as soon as an application is filed under Section 7 or 9 of IBC by a creditor? C. Overrules Hemang Phophalia and Elektrans Shipping Pte. Ltd. judgments. D. Winding up under Companies Act, 2013 vs. Insolvency Resolution under IBC, 2016. E. Disposed of.

NCLAT overrules its judgments in Hemang Phophalia and Elektrans Shipping Pte. Ltd. | Restoration of name of Corporate Debtor under Section 248(5) of Companies Act, 2013 cannot be restored automatic as soon as an application is filed under Section 7 or 9 of IBC by a creditor – Fedex Express Transportation and Supply Chain Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Zipker Online Services Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Resolution Applicant has no vested right that his Resolution Plan be considered and No challenge can be preferred to the Adjudicating Authority – Dheeraj Reddy Jinna Vs. Vijay Kumar V Iyer RP of Future Retail Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

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

Resolution Applicant has no vested right that his Resolution Plan be considered and No challenge can be preferred to the Adjudicating Authority – Dheeraj Reddy Jinna Vs. Vijay Kumar V Iyer RP of Future Retail Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Whether cyber fraud and the related police complaint can constitute evidence of a pre-existing dispute between Operational Creditor and Corporate Debtor in terms of the statutory construct of IBC – Optinova AB Vs. Bio-Med Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

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

Whether cyber fraud and the related police complaint can constitute evidence of a pre-existing dispute between Operational Creditor and Corporate Debtor in terms of the statutory construct of IBC – Optinova AB Vs. Bio-Med Health Care Products Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

CIRP Regulation 39 is enabling to Resolution Professional to permit modification of the Resolution Plan once but that does not give any right to Resolution Applicant to file a fresh Rplan – Rajesh Lallubhai Chitalia Vs. Brijendra Kumar Mishra & Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

CIRP Regulation 39 on which the Appellant has placed reliance does not give any entitlement to the Appellant to file a revised plan. The said Regulation is enabling to the Resolution Professional to permit modification of the plan once but that does not give any right to the Appellant to file a fresh plan on 06.01.2024. The Appeal is dismissed.

CIRP Regulation 39 is enabling to Resolution Professional to permit modification of the Resolution Plan once but that does not give any right to Resolution Applicant to file a fresh Rplan – Rajesh Lallubhai Chitalia Vs. Brijendra Kumar Mishra & Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Section 98 of the IBC provides for replacement of the Resolution Professional on sufficient ground – State Bank of India Vs. Mukesh Hariram Bansal – NCLAT New Delhi

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

Section 98 of the IBC provides for replacement of the Resolution Professional on sufficient ground – State Bank of India Vs. Mukesh Hariram Bansal – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top