https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302038 The proposed settlement plan for completing Phase-I required revision because the projected completion cost contained irreconcilable figures and the manner of fund mobilisation was not adequately explained. The revised status report showed substantial construction progress, but the promoter's proposed infusion appeared insufficient on its face. A further plan was therefore required to clarify the factual position, set out the funding arrangement, and specify completion within a definite timeframe before any decision could be taken on adoption of a reverse insolvency resolution process or restoration of the corporate insolvency resolution process. The promoter was directed to file a revised settlement plan within two weeks after sharing it with counsel for the homebuyers. en-us Thu, 25 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 01 May 2022 20:49:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302038 The proposed settlement plan for completing Phase-I required revision because the projected completion cost contained irreconcilable figures and the manner of fund mobilisation was not adequately explained. The revised status report showed substantial construction progress, but the promoter's proposed infusion appeared insufficient on its face. A further plan was therefore required to clarify the factual position, set out the funding arrangement, and specify completion within a definite timeframe before any decision could be taken on adoption of a reverse insolvency resolution process or restoration of the corporate insolvency resolution process. The promoter was directed to file a revised settlement plan within two weeks after sharing it with counsel for the homebuyers. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 25 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302038