<?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>Section 7 petition admitted: MoU clause created automatic default after 45-day cure, debt remains and appeal dismissed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94056</link>
    <description>NCLAT affirmed admission of the Section 7 petition, holding that the MoU&#039;s Clause 6 effected an automatic event of default upon non-payment within the 45-day cure period, which expired on 16.03.2020, thereby terminating the compromise and vesting the Financial Creditor with entitlement to recover outstanding dues. Subsequent payments and a separate WCTL-III disbursement did not revive the lapsed MoU or cure the Term Loan default, and Clause 4.2&#039;s discretionary &quot;may&quot; did not amount to waiver. The Tribunal found a subsisting financial debt and continuing default predating Section 10A; equitable considerations were irrelevant at admission. Impugned order stood unassailable and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:20:19 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:20:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=863696" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Section 7 petition admitted: MoU clause created automatic default after 45-day cure, debt remains and appeal dismissed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94056</link>
      <description>NCLAT affirmed admission of the Section 7 petition, holding that the MoU&#039;s Clause 6 effected an automatic event of default upon non-payment within the 45-day cure period, which expired on 16.03.2020, thereby terminating the compromise and vesting the Financial Creditor with entitlement to recover outstanding dues. Subsequent payments and a separate WCTL-III disbursement did not revive the lapsed MoU or cure the Term Loan default, and Clause 4.2&#039;s discretionary &quot;may&quot; did not amount to waiver. The Tribunal found a subsisting financial debt and continuing default predating Section 10A; equitable considerations were irrelevant at admission. Impugned order stood unassailable and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:20:19 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>