The case involves an application (IA/2468/2020) filed stating that the Corporate Debtor executed a rent agreement in favor of the Applicant. The applicant sought to restrain the Corporate Debtor from evicting them from the premises. The Resolution Professional's counsel stated that the rent agreement was between the Applicant and one Ms. Aarti Saraf, not the Corporate Debtor.
The applicant filed IA/2468/2020 claiming the Corporate Debtor executed a rent agreement in their favor and sought to prevent eviction. However, the Resolution Professional's counsel revealed the rent agreement was between the applicant and Ms. Aarti Saraf, not the Corporate Debtor. The court found the Corporate Debtor had no involvement in the issue, and the applicant was neither a creditor nor a debtor to the Corporate Debtor. This discrepancy led to the dismissal of the application.
Sign in to view the parties.
Order delive…
IA/2479/2020 li…
The case involves an application (IA/2468/2020) filed stating that the Corporate Debtor executed a rent agreement in favor of the Applicant. The applicant sought to restrain the Corporate Debtor from evicting them from the premises. The Resolution Professional's counsel stated that the rent agreement was between the Applicant and one Ms. Aarti Saraf, not the Corporate Debtor.
The applicant filed IA/2468/2020 claiming the Corporate Debtor executed a rent agreement in their favor and sought to prevent eviction. However, the Resolution Professional's counsel revealed the rent agreement was between the applicant and Ms. Aarti Saraf, not the Corporate Debtor. The court found the Corporate Debtor had no involvement in the issue, and the applicant was neither a creditor nor a debtor to the Corporate Debtor. This discrepancy led to the dismissal of the application.
Order delive…
IA/2479/2020 li…