<?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>2022 (5) TMI 207 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421947</link>
    <description>The High Court deliberated on whether a public sector undertaking, specifically the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL), should fund the restructuring proposal of Lavasa Corporation Limited during the corporate insolvency resolution process. The Court highlighted concerns about using public funds and the role of the Committee of Creditors in deciding payments to MSEDCL. It emphasized the importance of timely payments to MSEDCL to avoid disruptions in power supply and directed the Committee of Creditors to reconsider their decision not to pay additional dues promptly. The Court allowed amending the petition to include the Committee of Creditors as a respondent for their involvement in the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2022 08:34:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 207 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421947</link>
      <description>The High Court deliberated on whether a public sector undertaking, specifically the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL), should fund the restructuring proposal of Lavasa Corporation Limited during the corporate insolvency resolution process. The Court highlighted concerns about using public funds and the role of the Committee of Creditors in deciding payments to MSEDCL. It emphasized the importance of timely payments to MSEDCL to avoid disruptions in power supply and directed the Committee of Creditors to reconsider their decision not to pay additional dues promptly. The Court allowed amending the petition to include the Committee of Creditors as a respondent for their involvement in the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>