https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772905 The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a liquidator's order rejecting petitioners' claims under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The court held the petition was not maintainable as petitioners failed to utilize the statutory remedy under Section 42 of IBC within the prescribed fourteen-day period, having filed the writ petition two months after the liquidator's order. The court emphasized that IBC is a complete, self-contained code providing a structured three-tier remedial mechanism, and petitioners cannot bypass this statutory framework to invoke writ jurisdiction. Additionally, proceedings conducted without informing courts about CIRP and liquidation orders violated Sections 14 and 33(5) moratorium provisions, rendering such orders void. en-us Thu, 29 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jun 2025 08:38:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772905 The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a liquidator's order rejecting petitioners' claims under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The court held the petition was not maintainable as petitioners failed to utilize the statutory remedy under Section 42 of IBC within the prescribed fourteen-day period, having filed the writ petition two months after the liquidator's order. The court emphasized that IBC is a complete, self-contained code providing a structured three-tier remedial mechanism, and petitioners cannot bypass this statutory framework to invoke writ jurisdiction. Additionally, proceedings conducted without informing courts about CIRP and liquidation orders violated Sections 14 and 33(5) moratorium provisions, rendering such orders void. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 29 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772905