<?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>In personal insolvency case before NCLAT, Subhash Chandra opposes formation of 5-member NCLT bench</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/news?id=74585</link>
    <description>Personal insolvency proceedings raised a challenge to the National Company Law Tribunal&#039;s authority to constitute a five-member bench after a split verdict. The challenge contended that the mechanism for differing views permits reference to another member or members, but does not authorise a five-member bench. The larger bench stayed the third member&#039;s order, restricted asset alienation, and suspended an order permitting settlement of personal-guarantee claims. The dispute concerned the validity of that bench, the split-verdict reference procedure, repayment-plan eligibility, and pending creditor appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 13:46:04 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 13:46:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=920401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>In personal insolvency case before NCLAT, Subhash Chandra opposes formation of 5-member NCLT bench</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/news?id=74585</link>
      <description>Personal insolvency proceedings raised a challenge to the National Company Law Tribunal&#039;s authority to constitute a five-member bench after a split verdict. The challenge contended that the mechanism for differing views permits reference to another member or members, but does not authorise a five-member bench. The larger bench stayed the third member&#039;s order, restricted asset alienation, and suspended an order permitting settlement of personal-guarantee claims. The dispute concerned the validity of that bench, the split-verdict reference procedure, repayment-plan eligibility, and pending creditor appeals.</description>
      <category>News</category>
      <law>-</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 13:46:04 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/news?id=74585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>