Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) was not made out for a writ challenging NCLT, Delhi proceedings initiating personal insolvency against a guarantor. The relevant cause of action arose from proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and Section 60 placed the Adjudicating Authority in the NCLT having jurisdiction over the corporate person's registered office. As that office was in New Delhi, the fact that the credit facility had been availed in Kerala did not confer jurisdiction on the Kerala High Court. The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction, and the alternate-remedy objection was left unexamined.
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) was not made out for a writ challenging NCLT, Delhi proceedings initiating personal insolvency against a guarantor. The relevant cause of action arose from proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and Section 60 placed the Adjudicating Authority in the NCLT having jurisdiction over the corporate person's registered office. As that office was in New Delhi, the fact that the credit facility had been availed in Kerala did not confer jurisdiction on the Kerala High Court. The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction, and the alternate-remedy objection was left unexamined.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
