24/12/2024

A right to judicial remedy, is a right envisaged under the Constitution, which cannot be deprived of, merely because of a minor procedural error or procedural technicalities – Mr. Tajinder Singh Bhathal Vs. MRF Ltd. and Ors. – NCLAT Chennai

/ 17 minutes of reading

In this case, on one hand, the company petition under Section 59 of the Companies Act, 2013 was dismissed on 10.08.2022 because of the reason of the pendency of the civil suit, which was undertaken by the Appellant to be withdrawn and for which the Appellant has already filed a withdrawal application and on the other hand, the civil suit is RCS/123/2020 got dismissed as withdrawn on 13.08.2022 an application of the Appellant. Thus, the Appellant has been deprived of pursuing any of the remedies because of the dismissal of the company petition by the impugned order of 10.08.2022 and because of the civil suit being dismissed on 13.08.2022 as withdrawn.

A right to judicial remedy, is a right envisaged under the Constitution, which cannot be deprived of, merely because of a minor procedural error or procedural technicalities – Mr. Tajinder Singh Bhathal Vs. MRF Ltd. and Ors. – NCLAT Chennai Read Post »

Can settlement be allowed after the non-implementation of the approved Resolution Plan? – Dr. Yartagadda Krishna Mohan Vs. Committee of Creditors and Anr. – NCLAT Chennai

/ 7 minutes of reading

The Hon’ble NCLAT approved the view of the NCLT that Resolution Plan already having been approved cannot be faulted of in any manner whatsoever, as new chapter cannot be permitted to be opened, when the Appellant himself has failed on three earlier occasions to get his OTS proposals approved and because of the fact that the Resolution Plan as of now has already been approved.

Can settlement be allowed after the non-implementation of the approved Resolution Plan? – Dr. Yartagadda Krishna Mohan Vs. Committee of Creditors and Anr. – NCLAT Chennai Read Post »

Can a single lender settle the dues under RBI Framework after admission of insolvency petition? | Can an application for withdrawal from CIRP be entertained after the CoC approves the Resolution Plan? | Is writ petition maintainable even the efficacious statutory remedy under section 60(5) of the IBC available? – Mandava Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. PTC India Financial Services Ltd. – Telangana High Court

/ 39 minutes of reading

The Hon’ble Telangana High Court held that:
(i) The IBC does not provide for such a scenario that the borrowing entity/ Corporate Debtor can negotiate with only one of the creditors in the CoC to the exclusion of the other creditors.
(ii) The RBI Framework recognizes the precedence of the relevant statute (the IBC in this case) and that any settlement must be done within the statutory framework of the IBC.
(iii) The writ petition is also not maintainable in view of the efficacious statutory remedy under section 60(5) of the IBC which is a comprehensive Code envisaging all possible scenarios and modes of redress within the four corners of the IBC.

Can a single lender settle the dues under RBI Framework after admission of insolvency petition? | Can an application for withdrawal from CIRP be entertained after the CoC approves the Resolution Plan? | Is writ petition maintainable even the efficacious statutory remedy under section 60(5) of the IBC available? – Mandava Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. PTC India Financial Services Ltd. – Telangana High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top