https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784519 The challenged paragraph was upheld because it preserved the respondents' liberty to seek rectification under Rule 154 of the NCLT Rules and required any fresh application to be decided on merits, with due regard to the legal consequences under Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court treated this clarification as balanced and protective of both sides' interests, and found no reason to interfere. The appeals were therefore rejected, and the operative clarification in the impugned judgment remained undisturbed. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:03:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784519 The challenged paragraph was upheld because it preserved the respondents' liberty to seek rectification under Rule 154 of the NCLT Rules and required any fresh application to be decided on merits, with due regard to the legal consequences under Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court treated this clarification as balanced and protective of both sides' interests, and found no reason to interfere. The appeals were therefore rejected, and the operative clarification in the impugned judgment remained undisturbed. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784519