https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768157 NCLAT Chennai held that dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2) of I&B Code, 2016 are entitled to pro-rata share of resolution value rather than liquidation value when resolution value exceeds liquidation value. The tribunal directed payment of Rs. 42.09 crores to appellant bank and established that dissenting creditors receive priority in payment per Regulation 38(1)(b) of IBBI Regulations, meaning they are paid first in each instalment distribution while maintaining pro-rata calculation. The adjudicating authority erred in limiting dissenting creditor payment to minimum liquidation amounts. Appeal allowed with directions for payment by March 31, 2025. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Apr 2025 08:35:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768157 NCLAT Chennai held that dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2) of I&B Code, 2016 are entitled to pro-rata share of resolution value rather than liquidation value when resolution value exceeds liquidation value. The tribunal directed payment of Rs. 42.09 crores to appellant bank and established that dissenting creditors receive priority in payment per Regulation 38(1)(b) of IBBI Regulations, meaning they are paid first in each instalment distribution while maintaining pro-rata calculation. The adjudicating authority erred in limiting dissenting creditor payment to minimum liquidation amounts. Appeal allowed with directions for payment by March 31, 2025. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 28 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768157