https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790449 Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be used as a substitute for execution of a civil money decree where the real controversy concerns quantification of the decretal amount. The Supreme Court reiterated that the Code is a revival and resolution framework, not a recovery mechanism, and that a decree holder with an ordinary execution remedy should not invoke insolvency proceedings as a coercive debt recovery tool. The Court also took into account inconsistent positions on the amount due, pending execution-related proceedings, and the solvent, functioning nature of the corporate debtor. On that basis, the admission order was found unsustainable and the Section 7 application was treated as an abuse of process. en-us Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Apr 2026 08:51:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790449 Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be used as a substitute for execution of a civil money decree where the real controversy concerns quantification of the decretal amount. The Supreme Court reiterated that the Code is a revival and resolution framework, not a recovery mechanism, and that a decree holder with an ordinary execution remedy should not invoke insolvency proceedings as a coercive debt recovery tool. The Court also took into account inconsistent positions on the amount due, pending execution-related proceedings, and the solvent, functioning nature of the corporate debtor. On that basis, the admission order was found unsustainable and the Section 7 application was treated as an abuse of process. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790449