https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788496 After settlement of the operational debt dispute and the proposed withdrawal of the company petition, a third party who had not been impleaded before the adjudicating authority and was not shown to be a necessary party could not insist on being heard in the appeal. The original operational creditor, as dominus litis, was entitled to withdraw the Section 9 proceedings, and once that settlement resolved the dispute, the basis of the admission order ceased to survive. The appellate challenge therefore became infructuous, the intervention request was rejected, and the appeal was disposed of on withdrawal without examination of the merits. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Mar 2026 08:12:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788496 After settlement of the operational debt dispute and the proposed withdrawal of the company petition, a third party who had not been impleaded before the adjudicating authority and was not shown to be a necessary party could not insist on being heard in the appeal. The original operational creditor, as dominus litis, was entitled to withdraw the Section 9 proceedings, and once that settlement resolved the dispute, the basis of the admission order ceased to survive. The appellate challenge therefore became infructuous, the intervention request was rejected, and the appeal was disposed of on withdrawal without examination of the merits. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 17 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788496