https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399245 The court, in a petition under Section 9 of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, found in favor of the operational creditor due to the respondent corporate debtor's default in payment of operational debt. Despite the respondent's non-appearance and lack of denial or preexisting dispute, the court established the debt's existence through evidence provided by the creditor. Consequently, the court declared a moratorium, initiated the corporate insolvency resolution process, and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional to manage the proceedings, ensuring continuity of essential services to the corporate debtor while preventing legal actions and asset transfers. en-us Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Oct 2020 11:12:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399245 The court, in a petition under Section 9 of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, found in favor of the operational creditor due to the respondent corporate debtor's default in payment of operational debt. Despite the respondent's non-appearance and lack of denial or preexisting dispute, the court established the debt's existence through evidence provided by the creditor. Consequently, the court declared a moratorium, initiated the corporate insolvency resolution process, and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional to manage the proceedings, ensuring continuity of essential services to the corporate debtor while preventing legal actions and asset transfers. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399245