<?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 (10) TMI 1356 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AHMEDABAD BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291790</link>
    <description>The NCLT rejected the Resolution Applicant&#039;s intervention application seeking reconsideration of their rejected Resolution Plan by the COC. The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of a subrogation clause did not automatically lead to rejection, highlighting the unique nature of each case. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the NCLT reiterated its limited authority to question COC decisions, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions and the initiation of liquidation proceedings when necessary. Consequently, the intervention application was deemed lacking merit and rejected for non-maintainability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:21:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 1356 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AHMEDABAD BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291790</link>
      <description>The NCLT rejected the Resolution Applicant&#039;s intervention application seeking reconsideration of their rejected Resolution Plan by the COC. The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of a subrogation clause did not automatically lead to rejection, highlighting the unique nature of each case. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the NCLT reiterated its limited authority to question COC decisions, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions and the initiation of liquidation proceedings when necessary. Consequently, the intervention application was deemed lacking merit and rejected for non-maintainability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291790</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>