https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447467 The NCLAT Chennai held that appellants had locus to maintain the appeal as they were aggrieved parties with legal rights affected. The First Appellant company still held 42,00,00,000 CCPS in its name as the second tranche consideration remained unpaid, and the Second Appellant acquired the company as a going concern. The tribunal found that shares could not be transferred without payment and lender approvals. The adjudicating authority's order was set aside for violating natural justice principles by not hearing appellants, and any actions taken during appeal pendency were rendered otiose. Appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Dec 2023 18:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447467 The NCLAT Chennai held that appellants had locus to maintain the appeal as they were aggrieved parties with legal rights affected. The First Appellant company still held 42,00,00,000 CCPS in its name as the second tranche consideration remained unpaid, and the Second Appellant acquired the company as a going concern. The tribunal found that shares could not be transferred without payment and lender approvals. The adjudicating authority's order was set aside for violating natural justice principles by not hearing appellants, and any actions taken during appeal pendency were rendered otiose. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447467