https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360012 An efficacious statutory appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code barred writ intervention where the dispute turned on contested facts arising from a restructuring arrangement. The High Court held that alleged breaches of the Master Restructuring Agreement, non-release of working capital and subsidy, and alleged non-compliance with RBI directions were essentially factual controversies better left to the statutory forum. Because the petitioners had participated in the insolvency proceedings and no exceptional circumstances were shown, the writ petition was not maintainable. The Court therefore declined to examine the merits and relegated the parties to the appellate remedy, while granting limited interim protection to permit filing of the appeal. en-us Tue, 01 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 May 2018 08:04:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360012 An efficacious statutory appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code barred writ intervention where the dispute turned on contested facts arising from a restructuring arrangement. The High Court held that alleged breaches of the Master Restructuring Agreement, non-release of working capital and subsidy, and alleged non-compliance with RBI directions were essentially factual controversies better left to the statutory forum. Because the petitioners had participated in the insolvency proceedings and no exceptional circumstances were shown, the writ petition was not maintainable. The Court therefore declined to examine the merits and relegated the parties to the appellate remedy, while granting limited interim protection to permit filing of the appeal. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 01 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360012