<?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 (11) TMI 675 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761689</link>
    <description>Under insolvency law, a Section 9 application is not maintainable where a plausible, evidence-backed pre-existing dispute existed before the demand notice. Here, the contractual arrangement required the operational creditor to furnish a no objection certificate for copyright registration of the TVC, and pre-notice correspondence showed repeated requests by the corporate debtor and a denial in response. Applying the settled admission-stage test, the dispute did not need final adjudication; it was enough that the NOC issue was real, genuine, and not spurious or illusory. The application was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2024 08:45:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777870" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 675 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761689</link>
      <description>Under insolvency law, a Section 9 application is not maintainable where a plausible, evidence-backed pre-existing dispute existed before the demand notice. Here, the contractual arrangement required the operational creditor to furnish a no objection certificate for copyright registration of the TVC, and pre-notice correspondence showed repeated requests by the corporate debtor and a denial in response. Applying the settled admission-stage test, the dispute did not need final adjudication; it was enough that the NOC issue was real, genuine, and not spurious or illusory. The application was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>