Condonation of Delay denied: communication lapses and corporate restructuring found insufficient; prolonged inaction and lack of bona fides led to ref...
Export Support intervention INSIGHT launched to provide non financial capacity building, trade intelligence and pilot support with defined funding and...
Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the existence of a financial debt and default, but the Supreme Court held that insolvency cannot be used as a coercive recovery tool. Reading the quadripartite agreement, the Court found that the disbursement was made to the builder and was tied to construction, transfer, refund contingencies, non-transfer without consent, and security creation, making the dispute predominantly contractual rather than a simple lending default. As recovery proceedings were already pending before the DRT, initiation of CIRP was unwarranted and the refusal to admit the Section 7 application was upheld.
Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the existence of a financial debt and default, but the Supreme Court held that insolvency cannot be used as a coercive recovery tool. Reading the quadripartite agreement, the Court found that the disbursement was made to the builder and was tied to construction, transfer, refund contingencies, non-transfer without consent, and security creation, making the dispute predominantly contractual rather than a simple lending default. As recovery proceedings were already pending before the DRT, initiation of CIRP was unwarranted and the refusal to admit the Section 7 application was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
