https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467779 Allegations that the liquidator made false statements in contempt pleadings did not justify perjury proceedings or disciplinary reference, because the record did not show a deliberate or wilful attempt to mislead the Adjudicating Authority. Repeated efforts to gain access to the corporate debtor's office during the COVID period, correspondence with the KMPs about the keys, and uncertainty over possession of the keys and ownership of the premises supported the view that the omission to implead the appellant in the Section 19 application was not mala fide. The statements in the contempt pleadings were therefore insufficient to attract the criminal or tribunal framework for perjury. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Apr 2026 20:18:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467779 Allegations that the liquidator made false statements in contempt pleadings did not justify perjury proceedings or disciplinary reference, because the record did not show a deliberate or wilful attempt to mislead the Adjudicating Authority. Repeated efforts to gain access to the corporate debtor's office during the COVID period, correspondence with the KMPs about the keys, and uncertainty over possession of the keys and ownership of the premises supported the view that the omission to implead the appellant in the Section 19 application was not mala fide. The statements in the contempt pleadings were therefore insufficient to attract the criminal or tribunal framework for perjury. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467779