BOMBAY HIGH COURT - ORIGINAL SIDE,BOMBAY
S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, R. I. CHAGLA, JJ
Kamal K. Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. response to allegations and counterarguments. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 45) |
| 2. conclusion ruling on the legitimacy of the order. (Para 100 , 101 , 102 , 103) |
“ORDER
19. MA 2216/2019 in C.P. (IB) 4375 (MB)/2018 Heard the argument of the Ld.Counsel for the Financial Creditor and Counsel for the Corporate Debtor. Ld. Counsel for the Financial Creditor sought leave of the court for filing a fresh declaration of proposed RP in Form 2. Prayer is allowed. Financial Creditor may file declaration by Proposed RP in Form 2 by the end of the date.
It is Reserved for Orders.

6. Thus, the arguments were concluded and the order was reserved.
7. Mr.Dwarkadas, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has contended before us that the order impugned in this petition be quashed and set aside, not on merits, but only on the ground that it does not comply with the Rules. He would draw our attention to the set of Rules which are applicable to the proceedings.
8. The rules that have been pressed into service are to be found in the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 . Our attention is invited to Rule150 of the Rules. It reads as under:-
“150. Pronouncement of Order.- (1)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.