<?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>2017 (9) TMI 435 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347678</link>
    <description>A section 9 insolvency application is not maintainable where a real pre-existing dispute existed before the demand notice, including disputes over contract performance, bills, retention money, bank guarantees, or alleged defects already reflected in prior proceedings. In addition, initiation of corporate insolvency proceedings requires specific authority to present the petition; a general board authorisation to sign and verify documents is insufficient where it does not expressly empower the signatory to commence the insolvency process. The application therefore failed on both maintainability and authorisation grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 12:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488677" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 435 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347678</link>
      <description>A section 9 insolvency application is not maintainable where a real pre-existing dispute existed before the demand notice, including disputes over contract performance, bills, retention money, bank guarantees, or alleged defects already reflected in prior proceedings. In addition, initiation of corporate insolvency proceedings requires specific authority to present the petition; a general board authorisation to sign and verify documents is insufficient where it does not expressly empower the signatory to commence the insolvency process. The application therefore failed on both maintainability and authorisation grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347678</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>