Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT's impugned order, which had erroneously directed the Board to take over employees from the ATM and Cash Management Division of Respondent No.2 under the garb of interpreting the Scheme of Arrangement. The Scheme was fully implemented in 2011 with the knowledge of Respondent No.1 union, and multiple wage settlements were entered into without objections. Respondent No.1's application seeking modification of the Scheme's express terms was impermissible and barred by limitation. Only the ATM and Cash Management businesses were transferred, not all employees of the Transferor Company. Interpreting the Scheme to mean all employees stood transferred to the Appellant on the Effective Date was impractical and inconceivable.
The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT's impugned order, which had erroneously directed the Board to take over employees from the ATM and Cash Management Division of Respondent No.2 under the garb of interpreting the Scheme of Arrangement. The Scheme was fully implemented in 2011 with the knowledge of Respondent No.1 union, and multiple wage settlements were entered into without objections. Respondent No.1's application seeking modification of the Scheme's express terms was impermissible and barred by limitation. Only the ATM and Cash Management businesses were transferred, not all employees of the Transferor Company. Interpreting the Scheme to mean all employees stood transferred to the Appellant on the Effective Date was impractical and inconceivable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.