https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423703 An ex parte insolvency admission order was interfered with because the appellant had not received a full and effective opportunity to be heard, including after repeated adjournments and a change of counsel; the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. The tribunal also treated the insolvency filing as potentially being used as a recovery mechanism where SARFAESI, DRT and other recovery proceedings were already pending and the underlying liability remained disputed. On that basis, it held that the insolvency framework should not be used as a substitute recovery forum and required reconsideration after hearing both sides. The impugned order was set aside and the matter sent back for a fresh decision. en-us Fri, 10 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2022 08:43:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423703 An ex parte insolvency admission order was interfered with because the appellant had not received a full and effective opportunity to be heard, including after repeated adjournments and a change of counsel; the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. The tribunal also treated the insolvency filing as potentially being used as a recovery mechanism where SARFAESI, DRT and other recovery proceedings were already pending and the underlying liability remained disputed. On that basis, it held that the insolvency framework should not be used as a substitute recovery forum and required reconsideration after hearing both sides. The impugned order was set aside and the matter sent back for a fresh decision. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 10 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423703