https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414704 Appellate interference with a discretionary interim restraint was declined because the appellant showed no grave or irreparable prejudice from the Single Judge's refusal to stay the National Company Law Tribunal's status quo direction. The appellant had already obtained possession of the secured property, had itself moved the Tribunal to vacate the order, and that application was pending before the competent forum for prompt consideration. The jurisdictional objection was also to be addressed by the Tribunal in accordance with law. On those facts, the challenge to the interim order failed. en-us Tue, 26 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Nov 2021 09:09:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414704 Appellate interference with a discretionary interim restraint was declined because the appellant showed no grave or irreparable prejudice from the Single Judge's refusal to stay the National Company Law Tribunal's status quo direction. The appellant had already obtained possession of the secured property, had itself moved the Tribunal to vacate the order, and that application was pending before the competent forum for prompt consideration. The jurisdictional objection was also to be addressed by the Tribunal in accordance with law. On those facts, the challenge to the interim order failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 26 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414704