The case involves an appeal filed by Avasarala Venkateshwara Rao, in his capacity as ‘Promoter' and ‘Director' of the suspended Board of the ‘Corporate Debtor'. The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal with liberty to file a fresh one in his individual capacity.
Avasarala Venkateshwara Rao filed an appeal as ‘Promoter' and ‘Director' of the suspended Board of the ‘Corporate Debtor'. The appellant's counsel sought to withdraw the appeal because it was bound to fail due to a technical error. The appellant requested permission to file a fresh appeal in his individual capacity. The court granted the withdrawal with the condition that a fresh appeal could be filed within 15 days, subject to legal exceptions. The technical error is a key fact as it motivated the withdrawal and the subsequent permission to refile.
Sign in to view the parties.
The court allowed the withdrawal of the…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The case involves an appeal filed by Avasarala Venkateshwara Rao, in his capacity as ‘Promoter' and ‘Director' of the suspended Board of the ‘Corporate Debtor'. The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal with liberty to file a fresh one in his individual capacity.
Avasarala Venkateshwara Rao filed an appeal as ‘Promoter' and ‘Director' of the suspended Board of the ‘Corporate Debtor'. The appellant's counsel sought to withdraw the appeal because it was bound to fail due to a technical error. The appellant requested permission to file a fresh appeal in his individual capacity. The court granted the withdrawal with the condition that a fresh appeal could be filed within 15 days, subject to legal exceptions. The technical error is a key fact as it motivated the withdrawal and the subsequent permission to refile.
The court allowed the withdrawal of the…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.