Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
NCLAT upholds the Adjudicating Authority's approval of the resolution plan and dismisses the appeal. The Tribunal held that contested clauses (5(c), (h), (i), (j), (l)) do not divest the corporate debtor's contractual ownership in the 10.19-acre land, nor contravene the MoU (24.01.2008) or JDA (16.06.2008); the JDA expressly contemplated appropriation at Rs.1,400/sq. ft. and Clause 5(m) binds the resolution applicant to JDA obligations. The plan was not contingent or conditional in violation of Section 30(2)(e) IBC, since payment timelines and absence of an exit clause rendered it binding. The successful resolution applicant met eligibility criteria. No error in the AA's order; appeal dismissed.
NCLAT upholds the Adjudicating Authority's approval of the resolution plan and dismisses the appeal. The Tribunal held that contested clauses (5(c), (h), (i), (j), (l)) do not divest the corporate debtor's contractual ownership in the 10.19-acre land, nor contravene the MoU (24.01.2008) or JDA (16.06.2008); the JDA expressly contemplated appropriation at Rs.1,400/sq. ft. and Clause 5(m) binds the resolution applicant to JDA obligations. The plan was not contingent or conditional in violation of Section 30(2)(e) IBC, since payment timelines and absence of an exit clause rendered it binding. The successful resolution applicant met eligibility criteria. No error in the AA's order; appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
