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 Respondent No.1/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. The IBBI, represented by the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition due to territorial jurisdiction, noting that similar petitions were transferred to the Bombay High Court by the Supreme Court. The court found merit in the objection and disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner the liberty to file a fresh petition before the Bombay High Court. The court did not comment on the merits of the case.
Sign in to view the parties.
Date of Notification F.…
Date of Circu…
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 Respondent No.1/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. The IBBI, represented by the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition due to territorial jurisdiction, noting that similar petitions were transferred to the Bombay High Court by the Supreme Court. The court found merit in the objection and disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner the liberty to file a fresh petition before the Bombay High Court. The court did not comment on the merits of the case.
Date of Notification F.…
Date of Circu…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.