Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
NCLAT held that a Resolution Plan cannot be approved under Section 30(2)(b) r/w Section 31 without ensuring minimum payment to Operational Creditors and dissenting Financial Creditors, which must not be less than liquidation value as per Section 53. The Adjudicating Authority's role is strictly limited to verifying plan compliance with statutory requirements, without exercising equitable jurisdiction. The Committee of Creditors retains exclusive commercial wisdom in determining resolution plan terms. The Appellate Tribunal cannot interfere with CoC's decision unless clear statutory violations exist. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the original resolution plan's approval while emphasizing strict adherence to Insolvency Code provisions.
NCLAT held that a Resolution Plan cannot be approved under Section 30(2)(b) r/w Section 31 without ensuring minimum payment to Operational Creditors and dissenting Financial Creditors, which must not be less than liquidation value as per Section 53. The Adjudicating Authority's role is strictly limited to verifying plan compliance with statutory requirements, without exercising equitable jurisdiction. The Committee of Creditors retains exclusive commercial wisdom in determining resolution plan terms. The Appellate Tribunal cannot interfere with CoC's decision unless clear statutory violations exist. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the original resolution plan's approval while emphasizing strict adherence to Insolvency Code provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
