https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398398 The Tribunal dismissed the petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, ruling in favor of the Corporate Debtor. The claim for unpaid pathology services was rejected due to lack of evidence establishing a direct contractual relationship between the parties. The Tribunal emphasized compliance with Medical Council rules on fee-sharing agreements in the medical profession and instructed the Registry to communicate the decision without imposing costs on either party. en-us Mon, 10 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398398 The Tribunal dismissed the petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, ruling in favor of the Corporate Debtor. The claim for unpaid pathology services was rejected due to lack of evidence establishing a direct contractual relationship between the parties. The Tribunal emphasized compliance with Medical Council rules on fee-sharing agreements in the medical profession and instructed the Registry to communicate the decision without imposing costs on either party. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 10 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398398