https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433398 The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision directing the Bank to refund Rs.11,30,40,034 to the Corporate Debtor's account. The Bank's argument regarding the Non-Consortium Facility and preservation of rights under the Consortium Agreement was rejected. Despite claiming inadequate notice and citing the Covid-19 pandemic as a reason for non-appearance, the Bank's application to set aside the ex parte order was dismissed. The Tribunal found the Bank's reasons insufficient and affirmed the Adjudicating Authority's order, ultimately dismissing the appeal and closing the connected pending application for stay. en-us Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:02:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433398 The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision directing the Bank to refund Rs.11,30,40,034 to the Corporate Debtor's account. The Bank's argument regarding the Non-Consortium Facility and preservation of rights under the Consortium Agreement was rejected. Despite claiming inadequate notice and citing the Covid-19 pandemic as a reason for non-appearance, the Bank's application to set aside the ex parte order was dismissed. The Tribunal found the Bank's reasons insufficient and affirmed the Adjudicating Authority's order, ultimately dismissing the appeal and closing the connected pending application for stay. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433398