https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763620 NCLAT Chennai dismissed appeals by unsuccessful resolution applicant challenging rejection of intervention application and resolution plan approval under Section 30 of IB Code. Tribunal held appellant lacked locus standi to intervene or challenge approved resolution plan after their own plan was rejected. Court ruled unsuccessful bidders have no right to be heard during resolution plan approval stage. Impleadment application by successful resolution applicant was allowed to protect their interests in approved plan. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:28:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763620 NCLAT Chennai dismissed appeals by unsuccessful resolution applicant challenging rejection of intervention application and resolution plan approval under Section 30 of IB Code. Tribunal held appellant lacked locus standi to intervene or challenge approved resolution plan after their own plan was rejected. Court ruled unsuccessful bidders have no right to be heard during resolution plan approval stage. Impleadment application by successful resolution applicant was allowed to protect their interests in approved plan. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763620