Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the corporate debtor was liable to be placed in liquidation on the committee of creditors' approved decision and whether a liquidator was to be appointed with consequential liquidation directions.
Analysis: The application was moved by the resolution professional after the corporate insolvency resolution process yielded no resolution plan within the prescribed time. The committee of creditors had, with 100% voting, resolved to liquidate the corporate debtor. In such circumstances, the statutory mandate under Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 required the adjudicating authority to pass a liquidation order. Consequentially, the resolution professional, having given consent, could be appointed as liquidator under Section 34 read with the liquidation regulations. The order also necessarily carried the statutory consequences regarding public announcement, cessation of the earlier moratorium, commencement of the liquidation moratorium, intimation to authorities, and submission of the preliminary report.
Conclusion: Liquidation was ordered and the resolution professional was appointed as liquidator. The connected directions under the insolvency framework were issued.