Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
Era Infra Engineering Limited – Appellant
Versus
National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks relief through a writ mandamus against contradictory recovery actions. (Para 1 , 2) |
JUDGMENT :
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking a relief in the nature of writ of mandamus against the Respondent No. 1, thereby restricting it to take any illegal actions and initiate parallel recovery proceedings against its subsidiaries before different forums, which will defeat the purpose of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “IBC”).
2. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are as follows –
a. The Petitioner is a company incorporated on 03.12.1990 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1959. The Petitioner is an Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) commission contract company, which mostly operated on Building Operate-Transfer (BoT) models in India.
b. National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as “NHAI”) has issued tenders for the construction, maintenance and operation of three highway segments i.e., Bareilly-Sitapur section of NH-24 (hereinafter referred to as “Project A”); Muzaffarnagar-Haridwar section of NH-58 (hereina
This judgment clarifies that disputes involving the implementation of resolution plans under the IBC should be resolved by the specialized forums established under the Act.
The NCLT has the inherent power to restore a petition that has been withdrawn with its permission, and this power is derived from Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules and the residuary jurisdiction conferred on....
The initiation of arbitration is impermissible due to an existing moratorium that restrains all legal proceedings, including arbitration, until the related insolvency matters are resolved.
Judicial immunity under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 is upheld, but the court emphasizes the need for accountability and the exhaustion of alternative remedies before seeking writ relief.
Once a resolution plan is approved under the IBC, all claims not part of the plan are extinguished, and the tribunal lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate on such claims.
Non-stakeholder in CIRP lacks locus to appeal resolution plan approval under Section 61 IBC; Section 29A ineligibility requires NPA classification or formal director disqualification, not mere associ....
Condition precedent for invocation of Section 241(2) of the Act, which requires the Central Government to come to an opinion that the affairs of the company “are being conducted in a manner prejudici....
(1) Approval of resolution plan – If a claim is submitted by an operational creditor claiming itself as a financial creditor, claim would have to be accorded due consideration in category to which it....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
