https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458909 Paragraph 6.4(d)(ii) of the RBI Master Circular was read as requiring each bank or financial institution to make its own assessment of the offer for a financial asset and to accept or reject it individually; the majority approval mechanism did not override that discretion, so no mandatory obligation arose on dissenting lenders to assign the asset. Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the RBI Prudential Framework for Resolution of Stressed Assets were similarly treated as enabling a lender-driven resolution process through board-approved policies and an inter-creditor arrangement, but not as compelling lenders to accept a resolution plan or barring recourse to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. en-us Mon, 06 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Nov 2024 12:50:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458909 Paragraph 6.4(d)(ii) of the RBI Master Circular was read as requiring each bank or financial institution to make its own assessment of the offer for a financial asset and to accept or reject it individually; the majority approval mechanism did not override that discretion, so no mandatory obligation arose on dissenting lenders to assign the asset. Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the RBI Prudential Framework for Resolution of Stressed Assets were similarly treated as enabling a lender-driven resolution process through board-approved policies and an inter-creditor arrangement, but not as compelling lenders to accept a resolution plan or barring recourse to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 06 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458909