https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761567 Under Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the Adjudicating Authority must follow the statutory sequence: appoint a resolution professional under Section 97, await the Section 99 report, and then undertake adjudication only at the Section 100 stage. The binding law in Dilip B. Jiwrajka bars merits-based or jurisdictional objections from being decided at the Section 97 stage. Here, the NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority acted prematurely by deciding the personal guarantor's objections on merits, including the nature of the guarantee and limitation, before the resolution professional was appointed and the report was filed. The dismissal of the Section 95 application was therefore set aside. en-us Mon, 11 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2024 16:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761567 Under Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the Adjudicating Authority must follow the statutory sequence: appoint a resolution professional under Section 97, await the Section 99 report, and then undertake adjudication only at the Section 100 stage. The binding law in Dilip B. Jiwrajka bars merits-based or jurisdictional objections from being decided at the Section 97 stage. Here, the NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority acted prematurely by deciding the personal guarantor's objections on merits, including the nature of the guarantee and limitation, before the resolution professional was appointed and the report was filed. The dismissal of the Section 95 application was therefore set aside. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 11 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761567