<?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 (2) TMI 1304 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305234</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the Applicant, the Interim Resolution Professional for M/s. Saubhagya Ornaments Pvt. Ltd., in a case involving misappropriation of funds by the Respondents. The Tribunal ordered the Respondents to pay Rs. 50,00,000/- along with interest, holding them jointly and severally liable. It rejected the defense of the funds being part of an internal arrangement and lacking authorization. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the argument of misjoinder of parties and held all Respondents liable for payment. The Tribunal also allowed the claim despite the limitation period challenge and ruled that the amount was recoverable based on the Share Purchase Agreement and other documents provided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2022 21:56:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=696671" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1304 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305234</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the Applicant, the Interim Resolution Professional for M/s. Saubhagya Ornaments Pvt. Ltd., in a case involving misappropriation of funds by the Respondents. The Tribunal ordered the Respondents to pay Rs. 50,00,000/- along with interest, holding them jointly and severally liable. It rejected the defense of the funds being part of an internal arrangement and lacking authorization. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the argument of misjoinder of parties and held all Respondents liable for payment. The Tribunal also allowed the claim despite the limitation period challenge and ruled that the amount was recoverable based on the Share Purchase Agreement and other documents provided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305234</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>