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...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Right of appeal under Section 61 is confined to a person whose legal rights are directly affected, and a collateral grievance from a separate CIRP does not confer locus standi. The appellant was not a stakeholder in the CIRP of Afcan Impex Pvt. Ltd., so it was not a person aggrieved. On merits, the Tribunal found no established ineligibility of the resolution applicant under Section 29A: mere association with another company in CIRP was insufficient, no NPA classification material was shown, and disqualification under Section 164 could not be presumed without a formal declaration. Fresh objections were also not entertained in appeal, and the implemented resolution plan was treated as final.
Right of appeal under Section 61 is confined to a person whose legal rights are directly affected, and a collateral grievance from a separate CIRP does not confer locus standi. The appellant was not a stakeholder in the CIRP of Afcan Impex Pvt. Ltd., so it was not a person aggrieved. On merits, the Tribunal found no established ineligibility of the resolution applicant under Section 29A: mere association with another company in CIRP was insufficient, no NPA classification material was shown, and disqualification under Section 164 could not be presumed without a formal declaration. Fresh objections were also not entertained in appeal, and the implemented resolution plan was treated as final.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
