<?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 (12) TMI 1205 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763625</link>
    <description>A writ court will not interfere with an NCLT order admitting an insolvency application where the tribunal found that non-payment of a due debt constituted default and admission under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code followed. The Court also refused declaratory and prohibitory prayers attacking tribunal members and the operation of the SARFAESI Act, the RDB Act, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, finding no material basis and noting that substantially identical reliefs had already been pursued elsewhere. Repeated litigation, suppression and forum shopping were treated as abuse of process, justifying dismissal with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2024 17:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=784227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1205 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763625</link>
      <description>A writ court will not interfere with an NCLT order admitting an insolvency application where the tribunal found that non-payment of a due debt constituted default and admission under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code followed. The Court also refused declaratory and prohibitory prayers attacking tribunal members and the operation of the SARFAESI Act, the RDB Act, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, finding no material basis and noting that substantially identical reliefs had already been pursued elsewhere. Repeated litigation, suppression and forum shopping were treated as abuse of process, justifying dismissal with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763625</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>