https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763572 The SC allowed appeals challenging NCLAT's order regarding classification of appellants as financial creditors under IBC 2016. The Court held that Section 14(1) moratorium does not extinguish creditor claims but only prohibits certain enforcement actions. The guarantee liability continues to exist despite moratorium restrictions. The Court rejected arguments that moratorium prevents claim recognition, emphasizing that if breach of contract creates payment rights, the claim definition applies regardless of enforcement limitations. The SC quashed NCLAT's September 2022 order and restored NCLT Mumbai's March 2021 decision classifying appellants as secured creditors entitled to payment commensurate with their security interest. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Dec 2024 08:43:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763572 The SC allowed appeals challenging NCLAT's order regarding classification of appellants as financial creditors under IBC 2016. The Court held that Section 14(1) moratorium does not extinguish creditor claims but only prohibits certain enforcement actions. The guarantee liability continues to exist despite moratorium restrictions. The Court rejected arguments that moratorium prevents claim recognition, emphasizing that if breach of contract creates payment rights, the claim definition applies regardless of enforcement limitations. The SC quashed NCLAT's September 2022 order and restored NCLT Mumbai's March 2021 decision classifying appellants as secured creditors entitled to payment commensurate with their security interest. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763572