The appeal was preferred by the Appellant-'Corporate Debtor' against the order dated August 16, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chennai Bench, Chennai in TCP/232/(IB)/CB/2017. The Adjudicating Authority treated the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, admitted the application, initiated 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process', passed prohibitory orders, and requested the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India to recommend the name of 'Interim Resolution Professional'. The application was initially filed under Sections 433(e)(f), 433(i)(a), and 439(i)(b) of the Companies Act 1956.
M/s. Hyosan Automative India Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chennai Bench. The Adjudicating Authority had admitted an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Appellant. The initial application was based on Sections 433(e)(f), 433(i)(a), and 439(i)(b) of the Companies Act 1956, related to transfer of pending proceedings. The Appellant argued that the application was incomplete and did not comply with the necessary rules and procedures under the I&B Code and the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016. The Respondent, Metecno (India) Pvt. Ltd., claimed that the parties had
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Adjudicating Authority (National Company…
The Appellant-'Corporate Debtor' preferred an…
The appeal was preferred by the Appellant-'Corporate Debtor' against the order dated August 16, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chennai Bench, Chennai in TCP/232/(IB)/CB/2017. The Adjudicating Authority treated the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, admitted the application, initiated 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process', passed prohibitory orders, and requested the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India to recommend the name of 'Interim Resolution Professional'. The application was initially filed under Sections 433(e)(f), 433(i)(a), and 439(i)(b) of the Companies Act 1956.
M/s. Hyosan Automative India Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chennai Bench. The Adjudicating Authority had admitted an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Appellant. The initial application was based on Sections 433(e)(f), 433(i)(a), and 439(i)(b) of the Companies Act 1956, related to transfer of pending proceedings. The Appellant argued that the application was incomplete and did not comply with the necessary rules and procedures under the I&B Code and the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016. The Respondent, Metecno (India) Pvt. Ltd., claimed that the parties had
…The Adjudicating Authority (National Company…
The Appellant-'Corporate Debtor' preferred an…