https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450165 The NCLAT dismissed appeals challenging appointment of Resolution Professional (RP) under Section 95 of IBC for personal guarantors. The court held that following SC precedent in Dilip B Jiwrajka case, RP serves only as facilitator, not adjudicator, with adjudication occurring at Section 100 stage. Arguments regarding time-barred debt and authorization defects were deemed premature at RP appointment stage, with Section 98 providing remedy for RP replacement if needed. The Adjudicating Authority's order appointing RP was upheld as valid. en-us Tue, 27 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450165 The NCLAT dismissed appeals challenging appointment of Resolution Professional (RP) under Section 95 of IBC for personal guarantors. The court held that following SC precedent in Dilip B Jiwrajka case, RP serves only as facilitator, not adjudicator, with adjudication occurring at Section 100 stage. Arguments regarding time-barred debt and authorization defects were deemed premature at RP appointment stage, with Section 98 providing remedy for RP replacement if needed. The Adjudicating Authority's order appointing RP was upheld as valid. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 27 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450165