Following the principle of justice and equity, the defaulting company “Unitech” was liable to repay the amount to its deposit holders principal along with the future interest @12.5% per annum from the date of maturity of the respective FDR till receipt thereof alongwith Rs.50000/- each to assessees towards cost of litigation, costs etc
Neeraj Jain Vs Cloudwalker Streaming Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (NCLAT) we have found that demand notice delivered under Section 8(1) of the Code was not proper and was also incomplete. The Operational Creditor failed to submit any documents to prove in existence of the Operational debt and the amount in The Operational Creditor also failed to […]
Liberty House Group Pte. Ltd. Vs State Bank of India & Ors. (NCLAT Delhi) Mr. Virendra Ganda, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant(s) submits that the amount in terms of the earlier order dated 21st January, 2020 has been paid. Mr. Joy Saha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of ‘Committee of Creditors’ has also […]
Adjudicating Authorities cannot possess the power to direct the Central Government to conduct/order the investigation against any company. Taking a look at Section 210(3) of the Act, it is clear that the Central Government ought to conduct an investigation into the affairs of the Company by appointing an inspector and obtain his report thereof and then after scrutinizing the said report, the Government can approach the SFIO department regarding the same
Facts of the Case Reliance Jio Infocom Limited (‘Reliance Jio’) is a Public Limited Company registered under Companies Act 2013. It is an Indian Telecommunication Company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reliance Industries, headquartered in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. It operates a national LTE network with coverage across all 22 telecom circles. Reliance Jio filed a […]
The proceedings of the sixth meeting of the Board of Directors of ‘Tata Sons Limited’ held on Monday, 24th October, 2016 so far as it relates to removal and other actions taken against Mr. Cyrus Pallonji Mistry (11th Respondent) is declared illegal and is set aside.
Regional Director Vs Real Image LLP (NCLAT) Our Today’s article is about the Basic question that if an Indian LLP wants to process for the Amalgamation into a Indian Company, whether it required to obtain the registration under section 366 In the case of Regional Director, Southern Region, & Ors. V. Real Images LLP. If […]
The order of ‘admission’ is challenged on the ground that the matter having been heard by two Hon’ble Members and the final order could not have been passed by Hon’ble Member (Judicial).
Promoter, if ineligible under Section 29A cannot make an application for Compromise and Arrangement for taking back the immovable and movable property or actionable claims of the ‘Corporate Debtor’.
The Director, Deputy Director and other officers of ‘Directorate of Enforcement’ are prohibited from attachment of any property of the ‘Corporate Debtor’ (Bhushan Power and Steel Limited) without prior approval of this Appellate Tribunal. The property already attached by them be released in favour of the ‘Resolution Professional’ immediately.
