https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354217 Section 4(b) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act was upheld as valid because the legislative scheme clearly replaced the earlier sick-company regime with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Pending proceedings before the Board or Appellate Authority were lawfully made to abate, while only sanctioned schemes were expressly preserved and carried into the new framework. The Court held that a statutory right of appeal or forum can be withdrawn by express provision or necessary implication, so no vested right, legitimate expectation, or equality-based claim survived against the repeal and transition mechanism. The writ petition failed, and the petitioner was left to pursue the remedy under the new insolvency regime. en-us Tue, 05 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jan 2018 08:18:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354217 Section 4(b) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act was upheld as valid because the legislative scheme clearly replaced the earlier sick-company regime with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Pending proceedings before the Board or Appellate Authority were lawfully made to abate, while only sanctioned schemes were expressly preserved and carried into the new framework. The Court held that a statutory right of appeal or forum can be withdrawn by express provision or necessary implication, so no vested right, legitimate expectation, or equality-based claim survived against the repeal and transition mechanism. The writ petition failed, and the petitioner was left to pursue the remedy under the new insolvency regime. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 05 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354217