<?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 (3) TMI 1477 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313442</link>
    <description>The NCLAT Chennai dismissed a leave application filed by a shareholder seeking to appeal against a corporate debtor&#039;s sale during liquidation proceedings. The petitioner was not part of the Stakeholders Consultation Committee, had not filed any claim form during liquidation, and lacked standing in the liquidation process under Section 61(3) of the IB Code, 2016. The liquidator had properly conducted stakeholder consultations and secured creditor meetings regarding the sale proposal, which the petitioner&#039;s terms were rejected. The tribunal found the petitioner had no vested interest in the corporate debtor and the sale consideration was distributed per Section 53 of the IB Code.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:25:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 1477 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313442</link>
      <description>The NCLAT Chennai dismissed a leave application filed by a shareholder seeking to appeal against a corporate debtor&#039;s sale during liquidation proceedings. The petitioner was not part of the Stakeholders Consultation Committee, had not filed any claim form during liquidation, and lacked standing in the liquidation process under Section 61(3) of the IB Code, 2016. The liquidator had properly conducted stakeholder consultations and secured creditor meetings regarding the sale proposal, which the petitioner&#039;s terms were rejected. The tribunal found the petitioner had no vested interest in the corporate debtor and the sale consideration was distributed per Section 53 of the IB Code.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313442</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>