https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448381 The disputed Rayagada property was treated as part of the corporate debtor's liquidation estate despite title disputes, because assets awaiting determination of ownership remain within the liquidation framework. The earlier valuation was found inconsistent with the liquidation regulations, and Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 could not be used to bypass the mandatory valuation process. Confidential valuation material was not to be shared freely with prospective applicants, but the asset had to be revalued and the asset memorandum updated before any fresh scheme process. A prospective bidder was also held to have no vested right to challenge the order and was not an aggrieved person for appeal purposes. en-us Tue, 16 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Jan 2024 23:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448381 The disputed Rayagada property was treated as part of the corporate debtor's liquidation estate despite title disputes, because assets awaiting determination of ownership remain within the liquidation framework. The earlier valuation was found inconsistent with the liquidation regulations, and Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 could not be used to bypass the mandatory valuation process. Confidential valuation material was not to be shared freely with prospective applicants, but the asset had to be revalued and the asset memorandum updated before any fresh scheme process. A prospective bidder was also held to have no vested right to challenge the order and was not an aggrieved person for appeal purposes. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 16 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448381