https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97424 Impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was considered: applicant failed to show that the lis cannot be effectively decided in his absence, and submitted grounds lacked supporting documents or a distinct legally protectable interest directly affected by the narrow issue (alleged non-consideration of Section 65 in admission). The Resolution Professional had appeared, filed a response and is competent to represent the corporate debtor and obtain information from the suspended director under the insolvency code; consequently impleadment was rejected and the appeal will proceed without the applicant. en-us Fri, 06 Mar 2026 08:30:57 +0530 Fri, 06 Mar 2026 08:30:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97424 Impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was considered: applicant failed to show that the lis cannot be effectively decided in his absence, and submitted grounds lacked supporting documents or a distinct legally protectable interest directly affected by the narrow issue (alleged non-consideration of Section 65 in admission). The Resolution Professional had appeared, filed a response and is competent to represent the corporate debtor and obtain information from the suspended director under the insolvency code; consequently impleadment was rejected and the appeal will proceed without the applicant. Highlights IBC Fri, 06 Mar 2026 08:30:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97424