https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393710 The Court dismissed the petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments regarding procedural errors and the invocation of Article 226. The Court held that the Tribunal followed due process, and the petitioner failed to challenge the final order addressing their claim as a financial creditor. It was deemed that the petitioner did not establish extraordinary grounds to warrant Article 226 intervention, emphasizing the need to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. en-us Mon, 02 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Mar 2020 11:46:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393710 The Court dismissed the petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments regarding procedural errors and the invocation of Article 226. The Court held that the Tribunal followed due process, and the petitioner failed to challenge the final order addressing their claim as a financial creditor. It was deemed that the petitioner did not establish extraordinary grounds to warrant Article 226 intervention, emphasizing the need to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 02 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393710