Code Of Civil Procedure 1908 Application Under Order Vii Rule 11 Cannot Be Rejected On The Ground That Written Statements Is Not Filed.

Code Of Civil Procedure 1908 | Application Under Order Vii Rule 11 Cannot Be Rejected On The Ground That Written Statements Is Not Filed

The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court (“HC”) on 24th June 2024, passed an order[1] pronouncing that, “The filing of a written statement is not a condition precedent for considering an application under Order VIII Rule 11

Insights on the Proposed Amendments to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Process) Regulations, 2016.

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) released a discussion paper on 19th  June, 2024, seeking comments on four proposed changes to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate

Latest Development On Circulars For Lookout, Wilful Defaulters And Fraud

Download PPT

Interim Moratorium under section 96 of IBC, kicks in from the date when the Application was filed and the date shall not be the date when the Application is numbered

INTRODUCTION: In the case of Ms. Sangita Arora v IFCI Limited & Anr., the Hon’ble NCLAT held that the interim Moratorium is enforced from the date of filing of the Application made under section 95 of Insolvency

Uphealth Holdings INC. vs Dr. Syed Sabahat Azim & Ors. – Moratorium declared by U.S. Court under Insolvency Laws is not binding to Stay Proceedings in Indian Courts: Calcutta HC

Introduction: In the case of Uphealth Holdings INC. vs. Dr. Syed Azim & Ors., the Calcutta High Court while dismissing the Revision Petition held that moratorium declared under the United States Bankruptcy Law is not

Maharashtra Stamp Act Refund of Stamp Duty Cannots Be Denied on Mere Technical Grounds

Maharashtra Stamp Act | Refund of Stamp Duty Cannot Be Denied on Mere Technical Grounds

The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”), in a recent decision[i], upheld and relayed an observation made in its earlier decision of Committee-GFIL v. Libra Buildtech Private Limited & Ors.[ii], wherein the Hon’ble SC observed that: “19.

1 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 105