The Appellant challenged an order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Indore Bench, in CP (IB) /68 (MP) 2022, which admitted a petition filed by Respondent No. 1 under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The court sensed a possibility of a negotiated settlement between the parties.
The Appellant, Girraj Bansal (erstwhile Director of Corporate Debtor, Om Shri Shubh Labh Agritech Pvt. Ltd.), filed an appeal against an order by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Indore Bench. The NCLT order admitted a petition filed by BPC Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (Respondent No. 1) under Section 9 of the IBC. The Appellant expressed willingness to negotiate a settlement with the Respondent. The Respondent's counsel stated that previous attempts to settle the issue had failed. The court provided an opportunity for settlement talks, instructing the RP not to take any immediate action.
Sign in to view the parties.
CP (IB) /68 (MP) 2022…
NCLT, Indore Bench,…
The Appellant challenged an order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Indore Bench, in CP (IB) /68 (MP) 2022, which admitted a petition filed by Respondent No. 1 under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The court sensed a possibility of a negotiated settlement between the parties.
The Appellant, Girraj Bansal (erstwhile Director of Corporate Debtor, Om Shri Shubh Labh Agritech Pvt. Ltd.), filed an appeal against an order by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Indore Bench. The NCLT order admitted a petition filed by BPC Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (Respondent No. 1) under Section 9 of the IBC. The Appellant expressed willingness to negotiate a settlement with the Respondent. The Respondent's counsel stated that previous attempts to settle the issue had failed. The court provided an opportunity for settlement talks, instructing the RP not to take any immediate action.
CP (IB) /68 (MP) 2022…
NCLT, Indore Bench,…