https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432062 The court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint to substitute the Liquidator for defendant no. 1. The Liquidator's appointment necessitated this change, enabling the plaintiff to pursue the claim before the Liquidator. Subsequently, the court dismissed the suit and released bank guarantees as the insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code took precedence. The court emphasized the overriding effect of the IBC on other laws, directing the release of bank guarantees to the Liquidator for the liquidation process. en-us Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Dec 2022 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432062 The court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint to substitute the Liquidator for defendant no. 1. The Liquidator's appointment necessitated this change, enabling the plaintiff to pursue the claim before the Liquidator. Subsequently, the court dismissed the suit and released bank guarantees as the insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code took precedence. The court emphasized the overriding effect of the IBC on other laws, directing the release of bank guarantees to the Liquidator for the liquidation process. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432062