This is an appeal against an order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Court-IV, in C.P. (IB) No.- 685/2022, which admitted a Section 7 application filed by Aditya Birla Finance Limited, the Financial Creditor. The appellant claimed readiness to pay defaulted EMIs with interest within two weeks. An interim order was passed by the Tribunal on 10.11.2023, preventing the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). However, the appellant failed to deposit the amount, leading to the vacation of the interim order. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that the Loan Recall Notice was invalid because it was not in accordance with the Loan Agreement and there was no event of default.
Ratnakar Sharma filed an appeal against the order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Court-IV, in C.P. (IB) No.- 685/2022, which admitted a Section 7 application filed by Aditya Birla Finance Limited. The appellant claimed readiness to pay defaulted EMIs with interest within two weeks. The Tribunal passed an interim order on 10.11.2023, preventing the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC), but the appellant failed to deposit the amount, leading to the vacation of the interim order. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that the Loan Recall Notice was invalid because it was not in accordance with the Loan Agreement and there was no event of default. The respondent argued that the Loan Recall Notice was valid because the
…Sign in to view the parties.
The co-borrower of the Corporate Debtor sent a…
The Financial…
This is an appeal against an order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Court-IV, in C.P. (IB) No.- 685/2022, which admitted a Section 7 application filed by Aditya Birla Finance Limited, the Financial Creditor. The appellant claimed readiness to pay defaulted EMIs with interest within two weeks. An interim order was passed by the Tribunal on 10.11.2023, preventing the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). However, the appellant failed to deposit the amount, leading to the vacation of the interim order. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that the Loan Recall Notice was invalid because it was not in accordance with the Loan Agreement and there was no event of default.
Ratnakar Sharma filed an appeal against the order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Court-IV, in C.P. (IB) No.- 685/2022, which admitted a Section 7 application filed by Aditya Birla Finance Limited. The appellant claimed readiness to pay defaulted EMIs with interest within two weeks. The Tribunal passed an interim order on 10.11.2023, preventing the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC), but the appellant failed to deposit the amount, leading to the vacation of the interim order. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that the Loan Recall Notice was invalid because it was not in accordance with the Loan Agreement and there was no event of default. The respondent argued that the Loan Recall Notice was valid because the
…The co-borrower of the Corporate Debtor sent a…
The Financial…