<?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 (12) TMI 368 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431251</link>
    <description>Limitation in liquidation proceedings excludes the moratorium period under Section 60(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, with Article 137 of the Limitation Act applying to the liquidator&#039;s recovery claim; on that basis, the claim was treated as within time. A purported discharge through inter-company transfer under a tripartite arrangement was not proved by reliable records or consent of the corporate debtor, so the alleged settlement did not defeat recovery. The liquidator was permitted to pursue outstanding dues before the Adjudicating Authority to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and support liquidation value maximisation, and the recovery claim was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2022 10:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=698077" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 368 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431251</link>
      <description>Limitation in liquidation proceedings excludes the moratorium period under Section 60(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, with Article 137 of the Limitation Act applying to the liquidator&#039;s recovery claim; on that basis, the claim was treated as within time. A purported discharge through inter-company transfer under a tripartite arrangement was not proved by reliable records or consent of the corporate debtor, so the alleged settlement did not defeat recovery. The liquidator was permitted to pursue outstanding dues before the Adjudicating Authority to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and support liquidation value maximisation, and the recovery claim was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431251</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>