<?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>2019 (7) TMI 1627 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288441</link>
    <description>Section 9 insolvency proceedings were found not maintainable where the operational debt was disputed and limitation had expired. The Tribunal noted that the claim arose from 2012 purchase orders and invoices, but the contractual terms did not support the claimed interest and the alleged acknowledgements were insufficient on the facts to extend limitation. As no effective recovery steps had been taken for several years, the debt was not satisfactorily established and the claim was barred by laches and limitation. The Code was applied as a debt-resolution framework, not a substitute recovery forum, and the application was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2020 19:42:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=614685" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1627 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288441</link>
      <description>Section 9 insolvency proceedings were found not maintainable where the operational debt was disputed and limitation had expired. The Tribunal noted that the claim arose from 2012 purchase orders and invoices, but the contractual terms did not support the claimed interest and the alleged acknowledgements were insufficient on the facts to extend limitation. As no effective recovery steps had been taken for several years, the debt was not satisfactorily established and the claim was barred by laches and limitation. The Code was applied as a debt-resolution framework, not a substitute recovery forum, and the application was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288441</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>