https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788838 A concession agreement terminated before commencement of CIRP could not be treated as capable of mandatory revival through the insolvency process. The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority could not compel revival of a contract that had already ended years earlier, and the direction enforcing the resolution plan could not extend to such revival. The impugned order was therefore impermissible to that extent. The parties were, however, left free to pursue conciliation or arbitration in accordance with law, including any lawful request for revival, but without a compulsory tribunal mandate. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Mar 2026 08:48:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788838 A concession agreement terminated before commencement of CIRP could not be treated as capable of mandatory revival through the insolvency process. The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority could not compel revival of a contract that had already ended years earlier, and the direction enforcing the resolution plan could not extend to such revival. The impugned order was therefore impermissible to that extent. The parties were, however, left free to pursue conciliation or arbitration in accordance with law, including any lawful request for revival, but without a compulsory tribunal mandate. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788838