https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457221 NCLAT Chennai dismissed appeal filed beyond prescribed time limit by landowners whose intervention was rejected by NCLT. The tribunal held that appellants, who leased land to corporate debtor under liquidation, could not be considered "aggrieved persons" under Section 61 of IBC 2016 as they were conscious of proceedings and had intervened but were ultimately rejected. Since appellants failed to challenge orders rejecting their intervention applications and were not formal parties to proceedings, their appeal was not maintainable despite being heard as additional respondents. en-us Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Sep 2024 13:53:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457221 NCLAT Chennai dismissed appeal filed beyond prescribed time limit by landowners whose intervention was rejected by NCLT. The tribunal held that appellants, who leased land to corporate debtor under liquidation, could not be considered "aggrieved persons" under Section 61 of IBC 2016 as they were conscious of proceedings and had intervened but were ultimately rejected. Since appellants failed to challenge orders rejecting their intervention applications and were not formal parties to proceedings, their appeal was not maintainable despite being heard as additional respondents. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457221