<?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>2024 (6) TMI 135 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753528</link>
    <description>Liquidation sales of a corporate debtor as a going concern are analysed as statutory transactions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and liquidation regulations, not ordinary private contracts. The note states that a private sale requiring tribunal approval falls under Regulation 33(2)(d), that Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act do not govern statutory forfeiture in this context, and that the Adjudicating Authority may attach a forfeiture condition when extending time for completion. It further states that default despite extension can justify forfeiture even if a later sale fetches a higher price, and that alleged enforcement concerns or stakeholder conduct do not automatically entitle the bidder to further relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2024 08:14:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=755309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 135 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753528</link>
      <description>Liquidation sales of a corporate debtor as a going concern are analysed as statutory transactions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and liquidation regulations, not ordinary private contracts. The note states that a private sale requiring tribunal approval falls under Regulation 33(2)(d), that Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act do not govern statutory forfeiture in this context, and that the Adjudicating Authority may attach a forfeiture condition when extending time for completion. It further states that default despite extension can justify forfeiture even if a later sale fetches a higher price, and that alleged enforcement concerns or stakeholder conduct do not automatically entitle the bidder to further relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753528</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>