<?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>2018 (3) TMI 557 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356854</link>
    <description>RBI restructuring directions required timely satisfaction of stipulated conditions, including two investment-grade credit opinions, execution of the master restructuring agreement by all lenders, and upfront promoter contribution with guarantees. The Bombay High Court noted that those requirements were not fully met because the residual debt was not accepted as investment grade, all lenders had not signed, and the promoters had not contributed within time. It also emphasised that stressed asset resolution and banking policy fall within RBI&#039;s regulatory domain, and judicial review cannot substitute the Court&#039;s view for that of an expert regulator in economic and financial matters. In the absence of full implementation of the restructuring package, no writ relief was granted to restrain insolvency proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2018 22:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 557 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356854</link>
      <description>RBI restructuring directions required timely satisfaction of stipulated conditions, including two investment-grade credit opinions, execution of the master restructuring agreement by all lenders, and upfront promoter contribution with guarantees. The Bombay High Court noted that those requirements were not fully met because the residual debt was not accepted as investment grade, all lenders had not signed, and the promoters had not contributed within time. It also emphasised that stressed asset resolution and banking policy fall within RBI&#039;s regulatory domain, and judicial review cannot substitute the Court&#039;s view for that of an expert regulator in economic and financial matters. In the absence of full implementation of the restructuring package, no writ relief was granted to restrain insolvency proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>