Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. filed a Writ Petition (L) No. 1122 of 2017 along with Notice of Motion (L) No. 243 of 2017 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, challenging an impugned order. During the proceedings, the counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the petitioner had an alternative and efficacious remedy available by filing a Statutory Appeal. The petitioner sought interim protection while filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. filed a Writ Petition challenging an order. The Respondents' counsel raised a preliminary objection, stating that the Petitioner had an alternative remedy through a Statutory Appeal. The Petitioner sought leave to withdraw the Petition to file an appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, requesting interim protection while filing the appeal. The court noted that the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) had not been appointed and directed that the IRP not be appointed for two weeks to prevent serious consequences. This was to allow the petitioner time to file an appeal and seek an interim order before the Appellate Tribunal.
Sign in to view the parties.
The High Court of Bombay heard the Writ…
Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. filed Writ Petition (L)…
Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. filed a Writ Petition (L) No. 1122 of 2017 along with Notice of Motion (L) No. 243 of 2017 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, challenging an impugned order. During the proceedings, the counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the petitioner had an alternative and efficacious remedy available by filing a Statutory Appeal. The petitioner sought interim protection while filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. filed a Writ Petition challenging an order. The Respondents' counsel raised a preliminary objection, stating that the Petitioner had an alternative remedy through a Statutory Appeal. The Petitioner sought leave to withdraw the Petition to file an appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, requesting interim protection while filing the appeal. The court noted that the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) had not been appointed and directed that the IRP not be appointed for two weeks to prevent serious consequences. This was to allow the petitioner time to file an appeal and seek an interim order before the Appellate Tribunal.
The High Court of Bombay heard the Writ…
Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. filed Writ Petition (L)…