<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (7) TMI 776 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210862</link>
    <description>The court dismissed Malanpur Steel Ltd.&#039;s review petition, maintaining its classification as an Inter-Corporate Depositor (ICD) rather than a secured creditor. The court emphasized that the decree in Malanpur&#039;s favor did not automatically confer secured creditor status, and the scheme&#039;s approval was not contingent on Malanpur&#039;s reclassification. Additionally, objections to conditions in the payment scheme were deemed baseless, as creditors had consented to the terms. The court clarified that proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be adjourned until scheme payments were completed. The issue of pledged shares was resolved through a settlement, rendering further court intervention unnecessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 15:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 776 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210862</link>
      <description>The court dismissed Malanpur Steel Ltd.&#039;s review petition, maintaining its classification as an Inter-Corporate Depositor (ICD) rather than a secured creditor. The court emphasized that the decree in Malanpur&#039;s favor did not automatically confer secured creditor status, and the scheme&#039;s approval was not contingent on Malanpur&#039;s reclassification. Additionally, objections to conditions in the payment scheme were deemed baseless, as creditors had consented to the terms. The court clarified that proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be adjourned until scheme payments were completed. The issue of pledged shares was resolved through a settlement, rendering further court intervention unnecessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210862</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>