<?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>2025 (6) TMI 125 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772012</link>
    <description>Recovery proceedings concerning pre-CIRP dues and liabilities said to fall outside an approved resolution plan were held to lie within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework. The Code was treated as a complete and self-contained mechanism with a specialised adjudicatory hierarchy, so disputes within its domain should ordinarily be pursued before the adjudicating authority and appellate forum. High Court interference under Article 226 remains confined to exceptional cases such as lack of jurisdiction, gross violation of natural justice, or manifest arbitrariness. No such exceptional circumstance was shown, and the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2025 08:50:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=826327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 125 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772012</link>
      <description>Recovery proceedings concerning pre-CIRP dues and liabilities said to fall outside an approved resolution plan were held to lie within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework. The Code was treated as a complete and self-contained mechanism with a specialised adjudicatory hierarchy, so disputes within its domain should ordinarily be pursued before the adjudicating authority and appellate forum. High Court interference under Article 226 remains confined to exceptional cases such as lack of jurisdiction, gross violation of natural justice, or manifest arbitrariness. No such exceptional circumstance was shown, and the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772012</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>