<?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>2024 (12) TMI 1705 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466708</link>
    <description>The issue concerns whether a petition withdrawn on basis of a recorded settlement containing a clause permitting revival on default can be revived despite the withdrawal order lacking an express liberty to revive. The tribunal treated the settlement as part of the record and held that an express contractual revival right in the settlement governs; absence of an explicit liberty recital in the withdrawal order does not negate that right. Consequentially the revival application succeeds and the petition is restored to permit revival per the settlement terms; costs were awarded against the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 19:25:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1705 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466708</link>
      <description>The issue concerns whether a petition withdrawn on basis of a recorded settlement containing a clause permitting revival on default can be revived despite the withdrawal order lacking an express liberty to revive. The tribunal treated the settlement as part of the record and held that an express contractual revival right in the settlement governs; absence of an explicit liberty recital in the withdrawal order does not negate that right. Consequentially the revival application succeeds and the petition is restored to permit revival per the settlement terms; costs were awarded against the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>