"Abhishek is a practicing Advocate enrolled with Bar Council of Delhi. He has completed his BA.LLB (Hons) from school of Law, Christ (Deemed to be University) Bangalore and currently working as an Associate Advocate at the Chambers of Senior Advocate Ratan Kumar Singh. As an advocate, he deals with cases pertaining to Civil Procedure Code, Arbitration Law, Building & Construction Law, Insolvency and Bankruptcy law, etc. He regularly appears before forums including, Supreme Court of India, High Court of Delhi, Trial Courts and Tribunals. He has drafted various petitions, reply, complainants, notices etc. and undertook research on different propositions. As an advocate he usually prepare case notes, brief senior advocates and assists them in court. He had also worked as a Knowledge Management Associate at Fiducia Legal Advocates and Solicitors. Due to his interest in law and legal research he has found one of the fastest growing law blog and e-learning platform Nyashastram that organizes various Moot Court Competitions and ADR related Competitions. Abhishek is a skilled relationship manager, an excellent communicator, and skilled at upholding cordial working relationships with legal counsel and other external organizations."
Delhi HC dismisses an application under Section 27 of the Arbitration Act, directing the Arbitral Tribunal to assess evidence relevancy prima facie.
Modified Resolution Plan cannot be directly presented to NCLT without receiving final approval from the Committee of Creditors (COC).
HC held that There is no absolute bar against a lawsuit or legal proceedings continuing concurrently with liquidation proceedings under Section 33(5) of IBC (Liquidation Moratorium), unlike Section 14 of IBC (CIRP Moratorium).
National Highway Authority of India Vs Transstroy (India) Limited (Supreme Court) The counter-claim of a party cannot be rejected for the simple reason that the claims were not notified prior to initiating arbitration. Facts of the Case: The National Highway Authority of India and Transstroy (India) Limited entered into an Engineering Procurement and Construction Agreement […]
Whether the delay in making the impugned award rendered it liable to be set aside as opposed to public policy would also necessarily have to be considered in the context of the challenge?
Resolution Professional’s job is confined to making recommendations; there is no aspect of adjudication on the Resolution Professional’s behalf. The final decision on whether the application should be accepted or rejected is made by the Adjudicating Authority, which is not bound by the Resolution Professional’s advice.
