<?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>2021 (2) TMI 1184 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296652</link>
    <description>Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the committee of creditors may approve the manner of distribution in a resolution plan, including having regard to the priority and value of security interests when assessing feasibility and viability. That commercial wisdom cannot be displaced by applying Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, because the Code operates as the later law with overriding effect in the resolution process. A secured creditor that participated in and voted in favour of the plan was also precluded from later challenging the agreed distribution on priority grounds. The challenge to the resolution plan therefore failed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2021 09:50:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=651268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (2) TMI 1184 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296652</link>
      <description>Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the committee of creditors may approve the manner of distribution in a resolution plan, including having regard to the priority and value of security interests when assessing feasibility and viability. That commercial wisdom cannot be displaced by applying Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, because the Code operates as the later law with overriding effect in the resolution process. A secured creditor that participated in and voted in favour of the plan was also precluded from later challenging the agreed distribution on priority grounds. The challenge to the resolution plan therefore failed, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296652</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>