<?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 1751 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790682</link>
    <description>A secured creditor&#039;s right to stand outside liquidation under Section 52 is conditional and must be exercised in strict compliance with the liquidation framework; where the alleged pari passu security arrangement was incomplete and the creditor failed to act within the prescribed regulatory steps, inclusion of the asset in the liquidation estate was upheld and the liquidation sale remained undisturbed. Distribution of sale proceeds under Section 53 had to be determined first by the Adjudicating Authority, so that issue was remitted for first-instance adjudication. A third appeal filed beyond the statutory outer limit under Section 61 was held barred by limitation, and delay could not be condoned beyond that limit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:16:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1751 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790682</link>
      <description>A secured creditor&#039;s right to stand outside liquidation under Section 52 is conditional and must be exercised in strict compliance with the liquidation framework; where the alleged pari passu security arrangement was incomplete and the creditor failed to act within the prescribed regulatory steps, inclusion of the asset in the liquidation estate was upheld and the liquidation sale remained undisturbed. Distribution of sale proceeds under Section 53 had to be determined first by the Adjudicating Authority, so that issue was remitted for first-instance adjudication. A third appeal filed beyond the statutory outer limit under Section 61 was held barred by limitation, and delay could not be condoned beyond that limit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790682</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>