The case involves a petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The petitioner sought to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the corporate debtor. However, the corporate debtor was already undergoing CIRP.
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate CIRP against the corporate debtor, Govind Rubber Ltd. However, the corporate debtor was already undergoing CIRP. Consequently, the petitioner's counsel requested to withdraw the present petition. The court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition, granting the petitioner the liberty to lodge its claim with the IRP/RP already appointed for the corporate debtor. The key fact is the existing CIRP of the corporate debtor, which led to the petitioner's withdrawal request and the subsequent dismissal of the petition.
Sign in to view the parties.
Order sheet of the…
The case involves a petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The petitioner sought to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the corporate debtor. However, the corporate debtor was already undergoing CIRP.
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate CIRP against the corporate debtor, Govind Rubber Ltd. However, the corporate debtor was already undergoing CIRP. Consequently, the petitioner's counsel requested to withdraw the present petition. The court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition, granting the petitioner the liberty to lodge its claim with the IRP/RP already appointed for the corporate debtor. The key fact is the existing CIRP of the corporate debtor, which led to the petitioner's withdrawal request and the subsequent dismissal of the petition.
Order sheet of the…