https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293194 An approved resolution plan that remained unimplemented because the successful resolution applicant failed to infuse equity, assume management, and comply with the implementation schedule justified liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Tribunal applied the statutory consequence for contravention of an approved plan and noted the Committee of Creditors' support for liquidation. It also held that performance security stood forfeited where the plan was not implemented in accordance with its terms and schedule. However, a request to restrain encashment of bank guarantees was declined because the concerned banks and recipients had not been impleaded, leaving the applicant to file a proper application. en-us Thu, 16 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293194 An approved resolution plan that remained unimplemented because the successful resolution applicant failed to infuse equity, assume management, and comply with the implementation schedule justified liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Tribunal applied the statutory consequence for contravention of an approved plan and noted the Committee of Creditors' support for liquidation. It also held that performance security stood forfeited where the plan was not implemented in accordance with its terms and schedule. However, a request to restrain encashment of bank guarantees was declined because the concerned banks and recipients had not been impleaded, leaving the applicant to file a proper application. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 16 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293194