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...
A pre-CIRP concession agreement that had already been terminated could not be compelled to revive through an approved resolution plan or a later implementation order, because it no longer formed part of the CIRP estate in a manner permitting such direction. The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority had exceeded its permissible scope by directing the appellant, who was not a CIRP participant, to act on the plan insofar as it required revival of the agreement. The order was modified to remove any such direction, while the parties were left free to pursue conciliation or arbitration in accordance with law.
A pre-CIRP concession agreement that had already been terminated could not be compelled to revive through an approved resolution plan or a later implementation order, because it no longer formed part of the CIRP estate in a manner permitting such direction. The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority had exceeded its permissible scope by directing the appellant, who was not a CIRP participant, to act on the plan insofar as it required revival of the agreement. The order was modified to remove any such direction, while the parties were left free to pursue conciliation or arbitration in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.