<?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>2020 (12) TMI 155 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401356</link>
    <description>A director of a company under corporate insolvency resolution process, with management suspended, cannot independently maintain proceedings on behalf of the company. The Resolution Professional is the competent person to represent the company in such circumstances. Because the applicant acted only as a former director and sought return of an unencashed demand draft issued for the company, the court held that he lacked locus standi and the application was not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2020 17:06:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629450" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 155 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401356</link>
      <description>A director of a company under corporate insolvency resolution process, with management suspended, cannot independently maintain proceedings on behalf of the company. The Resolution Professional is the competent person to represent the company in such circumstances. Because the applicant acted only as a former director and sought return of an unencashed demand draft issued for the company, the court held that he lacked locus standi and the application was not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>