https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282622 A section 9 insolvency petition against a tea company under government control was found not maintainable without prior Central Government consent under section 16G(1)(c) of the Tea Act, because that special statutory consent operated as a condition precedent and the Tea Board control notification remained in force. The interim position concerning certain tea estates did not amount to consent for commencement of CIRP. A second petition for the same relief was not barred merely because an earlier petition had been rejected on a technical defect in the section 8 notice, since that defect had been cured. en-us Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Aug 2019 06:44:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282622 A section 9 insolvency petition against a tea company under government control was found not maintainable without prior Central Government consent under section 16G(1)(c) of the Tea Act, because that special statutory consent operated as a condition precedent and the Tea Board control notification remained in force. The interim position concerning certain tea estates did not amount to consent for commencement of CIRP. A second petition for the same relief was not barred merely because an earlier petition had been rejected on a technical defect in the section 8 notice, since that defect had been cured. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282622