<?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>Sanctioned scheme of arrangement binds creditors and bars separate suits over claims assigned under the settlement framework.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99733</link>
    <description>A sanctioned scheme of arrangement assigning specified creditors&#039; claims to the 63 Moons Group was held binding on all specified creditors, including dissenters, because the claims pursued in the civil suits arose from the same NSEL payment default and fell within the scheme. Once the settlement trigger event occurred, those claims, including claims against consenting brokers, stood assigned to the assignee, so the appellants could not continue independent civil proceedings for covered claims. The Tribunal also refused to revisit the scheme&#039;s legality, noting that earlier orders upholding it had already attained finality and were affirmed on merits by the Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 16:45:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 16:45:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=901736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Sanctioned scheme of arrangement binds creditors and bars separate suits over claims assigned under the settlement framework.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99733</link>
      <description>A sanctioned scheme of arrangement assigning specified creditors&#039; claims to the 63 Moons Group was held binding on all specified creditors, including dissenters, because the claims pursued in the civil suits arose from the same NSEL payment default and fell within the scheme. Once the settlement trigger event occurred, those claims, including claims against consenting brokers, stood assigned to the assignee, so the appellants could not continue independent civil proceedings for covered claims. The Tribunal also refused to revisit the scheme&#039;s legality, noting that earlier orders upholding it had already attained finality and were affirmed on merits by the Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 16:45:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>