Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 35 (1.61 seconds)
Echanda Urja Pvt Ltd vs Regen Powertech Private Limited on 31 August, 2023 cites

Radico Khaitan Ltd vs Bt & Fc Pvt Ltd And Ors on 26 March, 2021

88. Keeping in view that the parameters set out in 'Radico Khaitan Ltd. vs. BT & FC Pvt. Ltd. & 6 Ors.' (Supra), 'Oase Asia Pacific Pte Limited Vs. Axis Bank and other Financial Creditors' (Supra) 'for Consolidation' with respect to common control, common directors, common liabilities, Interdependence and intricate links between the Companies (Para 58 of this Order) is largely and satisfactorily met; RPPL and RISPL can be treated as a single economic unit; the approval by CoC of RISPL, and having regard to the Report of the Mediator, Hon'ble Justice K. Kannan, appointed by the 'Adjudicating Authority', the recommendations dated 23/09/2019 of the WG constituted by IBBI; the extract of the Executive Summary dated 18/01/2023, published by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, this Tribunal is of the considered view that Consolidation of the CIRPs be allowed and the Impugned Order of the 'Adjudicating Authority' dated 01/11/2021 is set aside. Needless to add, it is reiterated that this Tribunal, has not made any observations on the merits of the 'Claims' or as to whether some of the Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) Nos. 323, 328, 334, 335 & 340/2021 & 88,96,104 & 6/2022 Page 92 of 94 Appellants are 'Financial Creditors' or comment on the eligibility of the Appellants, in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 104/2022, who had submitted that they are ready to submit a consolidated bid for both RPPL and RISPL.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 10 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Oase Asia Pacific Pte Ltd vs Axis Bank Ltd & Ors on 26 February, 2021

that there were common directors; that there were common assets and liabilities. The interdependence and inter-lacing of finance was also considered as well as the pooling of resources. The Adjudicating Authority considered that DCCL's sole business is to operate the convention center located Lavasa Hill Town Ship built on land leased out by Respondent No. 2-LCL. The business is dependent on the working of LCL. For such and other reasons recorded in details, the Adjudicating Authority thought appropriate to consolidate the CIRPs. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has tried to search and nit-pick portions where DCCL is not referred to say that the particular yardstick does not apply. For example, common Financial Creditor. We find, only because DCCLdoes not have Financial Creditors, would not be sufficient reason to say that the yardsticks laid down in the matter of "State Bank of India Versus Videocon Industry Ltd." were not attracted.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

M/S Consolidated Construction ... vs M/S Hitro Energy Solutions Private ... on 4 February, 2022

87. To reiterate, it is held that the Appellants herein (except for the RP of RISPL) are all Operational Creditors in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited Vs. Hitro Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) Nos. 323, 328, 334, 335 & 340/2021 & 88,96,104 & 6/2022 Page 91 of 94 Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd.' (Supra) that the definition of an 'Operational Debt' as defined under Section 5(21) of the Code, is broad enough to include all forms of contract for supply of goods and services between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor, including ones where the Operational Creditor may have been the receiver / purchaser of goods or services from the Corporate Debtor. Hence, this Tribunal holds that the Appellants have the locus in their capacity as 'Operational Creditors' and being 'Aggrieved Parties' to prefer this Appeal.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 13 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next