https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760586 SC set aside NCLAT order allowing settlement between operational creditor and corporate debtor during CIRP proceedings. Court held appellant financial creditor had locus standi as "aggrieved person" under Section 62 IBC despite not being party to settlement. NCLAT erred in invoking inherent powers under Rule 11 instead of following prescribed Section 12A withdrawal procedure. Court found NCLAT inadequately addressed appellant's objections regarding potential asset dissipation and ongoing enforcement proceedings. Settlement approval without proper procedural compliance and stakeholder consideration violated IBC's collective proceedings framework. en-us Wed, 23 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:15:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760586 SC set aside NCLAT order allowing settlement between operational creditor and corporate debtor during CIRP proceedings. Court held appellant financial creditor had locus standi as "aggrieved person" under Section 62 IBC despite not being party to settlement. NCLAT erred in invoking inherent powers under Rule 11 instead of following prescribed Section 12A withdrawal procedure. Court found NCLAT inadequately addressed appellant's objections regarding potential asset dissipation and ongoing enforcement proceedings. Settlement approval without proper procedural compliance and stakeholder consideration violated IBC's collective proceedings framework. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 23 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760586