https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432084 Monies lying in deposit from proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 were held to fall within the liquidation estate and had to be dealt with under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The statutory waterfall required distribution in order of priority, giving precedence to liquidation costs, workmen's dues, employee dues, secured creditors who relinquish security, and other higher-ranking claims over an unsecured financial creditor. A crystallised arbitral claim did not permit the creditor to bypass the insolvency regime. The liquidator was therefore entitled to withdraw and realise the deposited funds for distribution in accordance with the liquidation framework. en-us Thu, 01 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Dec 2022 08:20:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432084 Monies lying in deposit from proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 were held to fall within the liquidation estate and had to be dealt with under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The statutory waterfall required distribution in order of priority, giving precedence to liquidation costs, workmen's dues, employee dues, secured creditors who relinquish security, and other higher-ranking claims over an unsecured financial creditor. A crystallised arbitral claim did not permit the creditor to bypass the insolvency regime. The liquidator was therefore entitled to withdraw and realise the deposited funds for distribution in accordance with the liquidation framework. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 01 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432084