https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752948 The Bombay HC addressed delays in NCLT's compliance with Rule 28 of NCLT Rules, 2016 regarding applications under Sections 94 and 95 of IBC, 2016. Section 94 applications were declined after 339 days and Section 95 applications after 181 days of e-filing, causing unreasonably prolonged interim moratoriums against personal guarantors. The court held that parties must comply with registry objections within seven days as per Rule 28. Applications previously dismissed and refiled without following proper appeal procedures under Rule 63 shall not be considered valid for Section 96 purposes and must be ignored. The petition was disposed of. en-us Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 May 2024 20:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752948 The Bombay HC addressed delays in NCLT's compliance with Rule 28 of NCLT Rules, 2016 regarding applications under Sections 94 and 95 of IBC, 2016. Section 94 applications were declined after 339 days and Section 95 applications after 181 days of e-filing, causing unreasonably prolonged interim moratoriums against personal guarantors. The court held that parties must comply with registry objections within seven days as per Rule 28. Applications previously dismissed and refiled without following proper appeal procedures under Rule 63 shall not be considered valid for Section 96 purposes and must be ignored. The petition was disposed of. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752948