https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328532 A prima facie conflict was identified on whether a sanctioned rehabilitation scheme under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 can reduce unsecured creditors' dues without their consent. The order compared earlier decisions on the respective scope of Sections 18, 19 and 22, and noted apparent inconsistency in the treatment of rehabilitation measures, creditor consent and the binding effect of a sanctioned scheme. On that basis, the Court held that the extent of BIFR's power under Section 18 and the binding effect on unsecured creditors required reconsideration by a larger Bench. en-us Wed, 02 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jun 2016 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328532 A prima facie conflict was identified on whether a sanctioned rehabilitation scheme under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 can reduce unsecured creditors' dues without their consent. The order compared earlier decisions on the respective scope of Sections 18, 19 and 22, and noted apparent inconsistency in the treatment of rehabilitation measures, creditor consent and the binding effect of a sanctioned scheme. On that basis, the Court held that the extent of BIFR's power under Section 18 and the binding effect on unsecured creditors required reconsideration by a larger Bench. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328532