Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
An insolvency application filed in the name of a company that had already amalgamated and ceased to exist was held not maintainable because the applicant lacked any subsisting juristic existence on the date of institution. The earlier scheme approving amalgamation had dissolved the transferor company without winding up, and a later order on the effective date did not revive juristic status in the name used for the Section 9 filing. In the absence of material showing that the named applicant continued in law when proceedings were initiated, dismissal of the company petition as not maintainable was affirmed.
An insolvency application filed in the name of a company that had already amalgamated and ceased to exist was held not maintainable because the applicant lacked any subsisting juristic existence on the date of institution. The earlier scheme approving amalgamation had dissolved the transferor company without winding up, and a later order on the effective date did not revive juristic status in the name used for the Section 9 filing. In the absence of material showing that the named applicant continued in law when proceedings were initiated, dismissal of the company petition as not maintainable was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
