https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352972 The Tribunal dismissed the application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the petitioner, lacking privity of contract with the respondent and failing to establish operational creditor status, did not meet the criteria for an operational debt. The respondent's objection on maintainability was upheld, leading to the petition's dismissal without costs, allowing the petitioner or its holding company to refile with a valid debt assignment in the future. en-us Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jan 2018 11:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352972 The Tribunal dismissed the application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the petitioner, lacking privity of contract with the respondent and failing to establish operational creditor status, did not meet the criteria for an operational debt. The respondent's objection on maintainability was upheld, leading to the petition's dismissal without costs, allowing the petitioner or its holding company to refile with a valid debt assignment in the future. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352972