<?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 (3) TMI 1627 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198783</link>
    <description>The National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad, dismissed the petition filed by Dr. B.V.S. Lakshmi under Section 7 of the IBC, 2016, seeking the initiation of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Geometrix Laser Solutions Private Limited. The Tribunal found that the petitioner did not qualify as a financial creditor and had not come to the Tribunal with clean hands. The Tribunal concluded that the petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case and that the alleged debt was disputed. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the petitioner was advised to pursue any other remedy available under the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2018 21:19:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1627 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198783</link>
      <description>The National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad, dismissed the petition filed by Dr. B.V.S. Lakshmi under Section 7 of the IBC, 2016, seeking the initiation of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Geometrix Laser Solutions Private Limited. The Tribunal found that the petitioner did not qualify as a financial creditor and had not come to the Tribunal with clean hands. The Tribunal concluded that the petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case and that the alleged debt was disputed. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the petitioner was advised to pursue any other remedy available under the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>