The writ petition challenges Regulation 31A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations 2016. The petitioner seeks directions to the IBBI to withdraw Notification F. No. IBBI/2022-23/GN/REG096 dated September 20, 2022, Circular No. IBBI/IP/56/2022 dated November 24, 2022, and Notification F. No. IBBI/2023-24/GN/REG103 dated July 20, 2023, with retrospective effect.
Suraksha Realty Limited & Anr. filed a writ petition challenging Regulation 31A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations 2016. The petitioner sought directions for the IBBI to withdraw certain notifications and circulars issued by the IBBI. The IBBI, represented by the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), raised a preliminary objection based on territorial jurisdiction, pointing out that similar writ petitions had been transferred to the Bombay High Court by the Supreme Court and were pending adjudication there. The court found merit in this objection, leading to the disposal of the writ petition with liberty for the petitioner to pursue the matter in the Bombay High Court. The court did not
…Sign in to view the parties.
IBBI issued Notification…
IBBI issued C…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The writ petition challenges Regulation 31A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations 2016. The petitioner seeks directions to the IBBI to withdraw Notification F. No. IBBI/2022-23/GN/REG096 dated September 20, 2022, Circular No. IBBI/IP/56/2022 dated November 24, 2022, and Notification F. No. IBBI/2023-24/GN/REG103 dated July 20, 2023, with retrospective effect.
Suraksha Realty Limited & Anr. filed a writ petition challenging Regulation 31A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations 2016. The petitioner sought directions for the IBBI to withdraw certain notifications and circulars issued by the IBBI. The IBBI, represented by the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), raised a preliminary objection based on territorial jurisdiction, pointing out that similar writ petitions had been transferred to the Bombay High Court by the Supreme Court and were pending adjudication there. The court found merit in this objection, leading to the disposal of the writ petition with liberty for the petitioner to pursue the matter in the Bombay High Court. The court did not
…IBBI issued Notification…
IBBI issued C…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.