<?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>2023 (7) TMI 962 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440689</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging a Demand Notice issued under Rule 7(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Rules, 2019, regarding personal guarantees for a debt. It held that the petitioner failed to establish a lack of jurisdiction and directed them to address the matter before the NCLT for a decision on the merits. The court highlighted that the NCLT was competent to adjudicate the issues raised in the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2023 17:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=720410" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 962 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440689</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging a Demand Notice issued under Rule 7(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Rules, 2019, regarding personal guarantees for a debt. It held that the petitioner failed to establish a lack of jurisdiction and directed them to address the matter before the NCLT for a decision on the merits. The court highlighted that the NCLT was competent to adjudicate the issues raised in the petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>