Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.27 seconds)
Jindal Power Limited vs Dhiren Shantilal Shah & Anr on 8 January, 2024 cites

Kalpraj Dharamshi Successful ... vs Kotak Investment Advisors Limited on 10 March, 2021

32. AA is very much aware of the judgement of Kalpraj Dharamshi Vs. Kotak Investment Advisors Ltd. and made serious efforts that the CD doesn't Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1166-1167 of 2023 20 of 23 enter into liquidation and resolution plan is worked out for the maximization of the value of the CD. It first reversed the liquidation orders and allowed resolution plans of SEAHAWK to be considered and then later on resolution plans of SEAPOL and then finally that of JPL, but all to be dealt as per law. The Regulations did not allow the case of JPL to be allowed by AA and we do not find anything wrong in the conclusion of the AA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 99 - Cited by 93 - B R Gavai - Full Document

Vistra Itcl India Limited vs Torrent Investments Private Limited & ... on 2 March, 2023

33. The judgment titled Vistra Ltd. ITCL (India) Ltd. vs. Torrent Investments Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. CA(AT) (Insolvency) No.132, 133 & 134 of 2023 passed by this Tribunal may not be relevant in the present matter as the referred judgment deals with Regulation 39(1-A)(b) of CIRP Regulations and we are dealing with Regulation 39(1-B) read with Regulation 36B(7) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process of Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 4 - Cited by 2 - A Bhushan - Full Document

Ramneek Goel vs Mr. Sunil Bajaj on 8 August, 2023

"..13. There can be no dispute to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that 330 days is the maximum period provided by the Code for the completion of CIRP. The present is a case where 300 days were expiring on 15.04.2021 and prior to expiry of the 300 days period, a decision was taken to re-publish Form-G. The CoC has reason to take a decision since they received an email from Respondent No.1 offering higher value. The objective of the IBC is to maximize the value of the Corporate Debtor and decision taken by the CoC to re- publish Form-G cannot be faulted in the facts of the present case..."
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A Bhushan - Full Document

Phoenix Arc Private Limited vs Spade Financial Services Limited on 1 February, 2021

10. It further submits that the overarching legislative intent of the Code is resolution of the corporate debtor and simultaneous value maximisation. The aforesaid legal position has been eloquently elucidated in several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court; and in this regard, it would be apposite to refer to a judgment rendered by a learned 3 Judge bench of the Honourable Supreme Court in the matter of Phoenix ARC (P) Ltd. v. Spade Financial Services Ltd., reported in (2021) 3 SCC 475.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 49 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document
1