TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, during the insolvency resolution process, the Tribunal could restrain the corporate debtor and its interim resolution professional from dealing with property that was the subject of an arbitral award and related power of attorney arrangements.
Analysis: The relief sought was examined against the moratorium under section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which bars transfer, encumbrance, alienation or disposal of the corporate debtor's assets and also prohibits execution proceedings. The record showed that the dispute over the remaining undivided share had been referred to arbitration, an award had fixed the amount payable, and the conditions attached to the corporate debtor's rights were linked to compliance with that award. The material also did not establish that the disputed property could be treated as free stock-in-trade for unrestricted dealing during CIRP, and the Tribunal considered that the code does not permit dealing with property in a manner inconsistent with the moratorium and the third-party contractual framework reflected in section 18.
Conclusion: The application was allowed and a status quo order was granted restraining the interim resolution professional from dealing with the property.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
