Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 96 of the IBC was held inapplicable to proceedings for making attachment absolute under the MPID Act because the attached property was not a debt and no debtor-creditor relationship existed between the appellants and the State. The Court further held that the MPID Act and the IBC operate in distinct legislative fields, so Article 254(1) repugnancy did not arise and Section 238 of the IBC could not override the MPID Act. Applying the binding precedent in National Spot Exchange Ltd. v. Union of India, the Court rejected the challenge to the refusal of stay and dismissed the appeals, also imposing costs for repetitive litigation.
Section 96 of the IBC was held inapplicable to proceedings for making attachment absolute under the MPID Act because the attached property was not a debt and no debtor-creditor relationship existed between the appellants and the State. The Court further held that the MPID Act and the IBC operate in distinct legislative fields, so Article 254(1) repugnancy did not arise and Section 238 of the IBC could not override the MPID Act. Applying the binding precedent in National Spot Exchange Ltd. v. Union of India, the Court rejected the challenge to the refusal of stay and dismissed the appeals, also imposing costs for repetitive litigation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
