https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785996 One-time settlement proposals, part payments and admitted correspondence were treated as acknowledgement of liability, supporting debt and default for sustaining the Section 7 insolvency application; the corporate debtor had not genuinely denied the outstanding debt, only the quantum, and the limitation objection failed in light of the acknowledged liability and excluded period. The challenge to rejection of the counsel-change application also failed because the corporate debtor was already represented, had filed a reply through existing counsel, and showed no valid procedural basis to displace that representation. The insolvency admission and refusal of interlocutory relief were therefore left undisturbed. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Feb 2026 08:24:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785996 One-time settlement proposals, part payments and admitted correspondence were treated as acknowledgement of liability, supporting debt and default for sustaining the Section 7 insolvency application; the corporate debtor had not genuinely denied the outstanding debt, only the quantum, and the limitation objection failed in light of the acknowledged liability and excluded period. The challenge to rejection of the counsel-change application also failed because the corporate debtor was already represented, had filed a reply through existing counsel, and showed no valid procedural basis to displace that representation. The insolvency admission and refusal of interlocutory relief were therefore left undisturbed. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785996