https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794045 Interim stay on admission of the corporate debtor into CIRP was disputed on two grounds: alleged restrictions under the Electricity Act and WBERC Regulations, and the alleged invalidity of the corporate guarantee. One view held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code had primacy over the Electricity Act's overriding clauses, and that the challenge to the guarantee did not justify suspending the insolvency process, so no interim protection was warranted. The other view treated the lender's authority to execute the guarantee, the effect of the WBERC regime, and the consequences of placing a distribution licensee into CIRP as distinct issues requiring deeper scrutiny. There was a difference of opinion, and the matter was referred to the Chairperson. en-us Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jun 2026 09:28:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794045 Interim stay on admission of the corporate debtor into CIRP was disputed on two grounds: alleged restrictions under the Electricity Act and WBERC Regulations, and the alleged invalidity of the corporate guarantee. One view held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code had primacy over the Electricity Act's overriding clauses, and that the challenge to the guarantee did not justify suspending the insolvency process, so no interim protection was warranted. The other view treated the lender's authority to execute the guarantee, the effect of the WBERC regime, and the consequences of placing a distribution licensee into CIRP as distinct issues requiring deeper scrutiny. There was a difference of opinion, and the matter was referred to the Chairperson. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794045