The case involves an application for rectification of an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad Bench. The petitioner sought correction in the order dated 13.11.2018 in CP (IB) 540/9/NCLT/AHM/2018. The initial order stated that the matter was withdrawn due to a settlement between the parties. However, the petitioner clarified that the withdrawal was due to the matter being filed under a different provision of law, specifically Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, instead of Section 7.
Tirth Reality filed a petition against Appliance Mart Pvt. Ltd. under CP (IB) No.540/9/NCLT/AHM/2018. The initial order dated 13.11.2018 stated that the matter was withdrawn due to a settlement between the parties. However, the petitioner, Tirth Reality, clarified that the withdrawal was due to a mistake in filing the matter under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as they were financial creditors and not operational creditors. They sought to withdraw the petition filed under Section 9 and requested permission to file a fresh petition under the appropriate provision of law. The petitioner filed a 'Speaking to Minutes' application to rectify the error in the order.
Sign in to view the parties.
Tribunal passed an order stating the matter…
Petitioner's counsel…
The case involves an application for rectification of an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad Bench. The petitioner sought correction in the order dated 13.11.2018 in CP (IB) 540/9/NCLT/AHM/2018. The initial order stated that the matter was withdrawn due to a settlement between the parties. However, the petitioner clarified that the withdrawal was due to the matter being filed under a different provision of law, specifically Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, instead of Section 7.
Tirth Reality filed a petition against Appliance Mart Pvt. Ltd. under CP (IB) No.540/9/NCLT/AHM/2018. The initial order dated 13.11.2018 stated that the matter was withdrawn due to a settlement between the parties. However, the petitioner, Tirth Reality, clarified that the withdrawal was due to a mistake in filing the matter under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as they were financial creditors and not operational creditors. They sought to withdraw the petition filed under Section 9 and requested permission to file a fresh petition under the appropriate provision of law. The petitioner filed a 'Speaking to Minutes' application to rectify the error in the order.
Tribunal passed an order stating the matter…
Petitioner's counsel…