The petition challenges an order dated 2024-12-16 passed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), where the Disciplinary Committee (DC) issued directions, including reinvestigation of issues, suspension of authorization for assignment of Mr. Sanjay Garg for 3 months, and a warning against misrepresentation of facts. The petitioner, Sanjay Garg, contests the order, arguing that paragraph 2.3.8 of the order goes beyond the allegations in the show cause notice and that the finding is perverse.
Sanjay Garg, the petitioner, challenges an order passed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) through its Disciplinary Committee (DC). The DC's order directed the IBBI to reinvestigate certain issues, suspended Sanjay Garg's authorization for assignment for three months due to contravention of the Code of Conduct, and warned him against misrepresenting facts. The petitioner argues that the DC's findings exceeded the scope of the show cause notice, particularly concerning the consideration of a resolution plan from United Biotech Private Limited (UBPL) after the deadline. The petitioner contends that he did not accept any resolution plan beyond the stipulated deadline and that the DC's findings are perverse. The petitioner also disputes the finding that
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India…
The Delhi High Court issued notice to the…
The petition challenges an order dated 2024-12-16 passed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), where the Disciplinary Committee (DC) issued directions, including reinvestigation of issues, suspension of authorization for assignment of Mr. Sanjay Garg for 3 months, and a warning against misrepresentation of facts. The petitioner, Sanjay Garg, contests the order, arguing that paragraph 2.3.8 of the order goes beyond the allegations in the show cause notice and that the finding is perverse.
Sanjay Garg, the petitioner, challenges an order passed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) through its Disciplinary Committee (DC). The DC's order directed the IBBI to reinvestigate certain issues, suspended Sanjay Garg's authorization for assignment for three months due to contravention of the Code of Conduct, and warned him against misrepresenting facts. The petitioner argues that the DC's findings exceeded the scope of the show cause notice, particularly concerning the consideration of a resolution plan from United Biotech Private Limited (UBPL) after the deadline. The petitioner contends that he did not accept any resolution plan beyond the stipulated deadline and that the DC's findings are perverse. The petitioner also disputes the finding that
…The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India…
The Delhi High Court issued notice to the…