The Company Appeal was preferred by the Appellant, the Suspended Director of Corporate Debtor Lumiford Private Ltd, against the Impugned Order of 10.06.2024, passed by the Ld. NCLT, Hyderabad Bench in CP (IB) No.167/9/HDB/2023, which admitted a petition under Section 9 of I & B Code and declared a moratorium under Section 14. The Resolution Professional filed IA No. 1177/2024 seeking directions to restrain the Respondent/Erstwhile Management from hindering the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
Abhijit Bhattacharjee, the Suspended Director of Lumiford Private Ltd, filed a Company Appeal against an order passed by the NCLT Hyderabad Bench, which admitted a petition under Section 9 of the I&B Code and declared a moratorium. The Resolution Professional filed an application (IA No. 1177/2024) seeking directions to restrain the Respondent/Erstwhile Management from hindering the CIRP. The Respondents' Counsel opposed the stay, citing the appellant's admission of default under the agreement. An interim order had previously been passed, keeping all proceedings in abeyance. The Resolution Professional's application sought to restore the powers to conduct the affairs of the Corporate Debtor. The COC had already been constituted.
Sign in to view the parties.
CP (IB) No.167/9/HDB/202…
Ld. NCLT, Hyderabad Bench passed the Impugned…
The Company Appeal was preferred by the Appellant, the Suspended Director of Corporate Debtor Lumiford Private Ltd, against the Impugned Order of 10.06.2024, passed by the Ld. NCLT, Hyderabad Bench in CP (IB) No.167/9/HDB/2023, which admitted a petition under Section 9 of I & B Code and declared a moratorium under Section 14. The Resolution Professional filed IA No. 1177/2024 seeking directions to restrain the Respondent/Erstwhile Management from hindering the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
Abhijit Bhattacharjee, the Suspended Director of Lumiford Private Ltd, filed a Company Appeal against an order passed by the NCLT Hyderabad Bench, which admitted a petition under Section 9 of the I&B Code and declared a moratorium. The Resolution Professional filed an application (IA No. 1177/2024) seeking directions to restrain the Respondent/Erstwhile Management from hindering the CIRP. The Respondents' Counsel opposed the stay, citing the appellant's admission of default under the agreement. An interim order had previously been passed, keeping all proceedings in abeyance. The Resolution Professional's application sought to restore the powers to conduct the affairs of the Corporate Debtor. The COC had already been constituted.
CP (IB) No.167/9/HDB/202…
Ld. NCLT, Hyderabad Bench passed the Impugned…