15/09/2021

Court should not go into the academic issues and seek to interpret the provisions of law when it is not necessary for deciding the issues in the appeal(s) – K.N. Rajakumar Vs. V. Nagarajan & Ors. – Supreme Court

Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it is a settled principle of law that the Court should not go into the academic issues and seek to interpret the provisions of law when it is not necessary for deciding the issues in the appeal(s). Reference in this regard could be made to the judgments of this Court in the cases of Vidya Charan Shukla v. Purshottam Lal Kaushik (1981) 2 SCC 84 and K.I. Shephard and others v. Union of India and others (1987) 4 SCC 431.(p11). Further, it held that it could thus be seen that one of the principal objects of the IBC is providing for revival of the Corporate Debtor and to make it a going concern. Every attempt has to be first made to revive the concern and make it a going concern, liquidation being the last resort.(p16)

Court should not go into the academic issues and seek to interpret the provisions of law when it is not necessary for deciding the issues in the appeal(s) – K.N. Rajakumar Vs. V. Nagarajan & Ors. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Vs. The Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay being the Liquidator of Ankur Drugs and Pharma Limited (In Liq.) – Bombay High Court

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

Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Vs. The Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay being the Liquidator of Ankur Drugs and Pharma Limited (In Liq.) – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top