<?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>2026 (4) TMI 163 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789094</link>
    <description>Amounts held with the corporate debtor could be used to pay erstwhile employees&#039; gratuity dues only if those claims were duly admitted in liquidation; where the claims were belated or not admitted, the balance had to be released to the appellant. The liquidator was also allowed to use the corporate debtor&#039;s funds to continue arbitration proceedings against BSNL, because the sale notice contemplated distribution of any arbitration proceeds under the insolvency framework but did not bar expenditure from the debtor&#039;s funds for prosecuting that claim. The order was modified on gratuity payment and otherwise left undisturbed on the arbitration issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:49:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 163 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789094</link>
      <description>Amounts held with the corporate debtor could be used to pay erstwhile employees&#039; gratuity dues only if those claims were duly admitted in liquidation; where the claims were belated or not admitted, the balance had to be released to the appellant. The liquidator was also allowed to use the corporate debtor&#039;s funds to continue arbitration proceedings against BSNL, because the sale notice contemplated distribution of any arbitration proceeds under the insolvency framework but did not bar expenditure from the debtor&#039;s funds for prosecuting that claim. The order was modified on gratuity payment and otherwise left undisturbed on the arbitration issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789094</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>