Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.22 seconds)Section 167 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 164 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 38 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 238 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 38 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 30 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Committee Of Creditors Of Essar Steel ... vs Satish Kumar Gupta on 15 November, 2019
9. The Learned Counsel for Appellant has referred to the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
Committee of Creditors of Essar Steels v. Satish Kumar Gupta
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 618 of 2021
&
I.A. No. 1647 of 2021
Page 9 of 37
[CA 8766-67/2019] and Swiss Ribbons vs. Union of India & Ors
[(2019 4 SCC 17] to point out that the operational creditors
cannot be differentiated when they are from same class and those
operational creditors who had filed claims which were admitted
should have been given payments at least equal to the liquidation
value, and therefore payments to different classes of operational
creditors have not been in a fair and equitable manner. He has
further argued that the R-3 is the promoter and director of R-2,
who stood disqualified under sections 164 and 167 of The
Companies Act, 2013 and therefore the reins of the corporate
debtor could not have been given in the hands of such disqualified
persons after insolvency resolution of the corporate debtor.