https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764572 After commencement of CIRP, attempts to secure a one-time settlement or challenge creditor decisions must be pursued within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework before the NCLT. The Court treated the IBC as a self-contained code, held that an RBI framework could not create a standalone right to seek OTS outside CIRP, and found that the absence of a Board-approved policy did not invalidate rejection of the settlement request once insolvency proceedings were underway. It also held that writ jurisdiction could not bypass the statutory remedy under section 60(5), that a sole financial creditor could not conclude a bilateral settlement in place of the collective insolvency process, and that withdrawal could not reopen an approved resolution plan. en-us Tue, 24 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764572 After commencement of CIRP, attempts to secure a one-time settlement or challenge creditor decisions must be pursued within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework before the NCLT. The Court treated the IBC as a self-contained code, held that an RBI framework could not create a standalone right to seek OTS outside CIRP, and found that the absence of a Board-approved policy did not invalidate rejection of the settlement request once insolvency proceedings were underway. It also held that writ jurisdiction could not bypass the statutory remedy under section 60(5), that a sole financial creditor could not conclude a bilateral settlement in place of the collective insolvency process, and that withdrawal could not reopen an approved resolution plan. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 24 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764572