Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The dues shown payable to the appellant was Rs. 13,47,40,819 while the appellant claimed it to be Rs. 43,40,31,951.
Supreme Court observed that the law laid in Digambar Anandrao Pingle (supra) by NCLAT was not correct, and that the date of submission of resolution plan has to be the cut off date.
by Lavanya Pathak† and Akshay Sharma††
Jharkhand High Court clarified that Section 233 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (‘IBC Code’) gives protection to a resolution professional from criminal prosecution for acts in good faith, and not where he has been apprehended red-handed with the bribe amount.
Supreme Court clarified that the substituted Regulation 30-A of IBBI Regulations clearly provided for withdrawal applications being entertained before constitution of Committee of Creditors.
NCLAT observed that allowing present appeal holding the Successful Resolution Applicant ineligible would automatically make the resolution plan redundant.