{"id":237751,"date":"2020-10-20T16:28:52","date_gmt":"2020-10-20T10:58:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=237751"},"modified":"2020-11-06T12:47:43","modified_gmt":"2020-11-06T07:17:43","slug":"nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/","title":{"rendered":"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to “Scheme” under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds"},"content":{"rendered":"

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT):\u00a0<\/strong>A Division Bench of Justice Jarat Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Balvinder Singh (Technical Member) while addressing the present appeal observed that,<\/p>\n

Scheme under Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 cannot be used as method of rectification of the actions already taken.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Appellant preferred the instant appeal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 challenging the impugned order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai.<\/p>\n

What led to the filing of the present appeal?<\/span><\/h3>\n

Respondent 1 presented a Scheme of Arrangement<\/strong> under Sections 391-394 of Companies Act, 1956 (Existing Sections 230-232 of Companies Act, 2013) for sanction of the Arrangement embodied in the scheme originally filed before Bombay High Court which by virtue of MCA notification got transferred to NCLT, Mumbai.<\/p>\n

Appellant pointed out certain irregularities and non-compliance and raised the objections that the Scheme of Arrangements<\/strong> is a mere rectification of action already taken by the respondent company without obtaining approval of Tribunal and other Regulatory Authorities as required under the provisions of Companies Act.<\/p>\n

Since, NCLT, Mumbai in its order held that the scheme appeared to be fair and reasonable, the appellant being aggrieved with the same filed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Observations of the Tribunal<\/span><\/h3>\n

Bench noted that the in view of the records it was apparent that there were irregularities and non-compliances from a very long time due to which Stock Exchange took action against the respondent 1 company and suspended the trading of its securities in the year 2002.<\/p>\n

No action being taken on behalf of the respondent 1 company had a serious impact on the investors who invested their hard-earned money in the company. The non-compliances and irregularities or any illegal act already committed cannot be ratified under the umbrella of “scheme” as envisaged under Section 230-232 of Companies Act, 2013.<\/p>\n

Further, even if the objection of the Respondent 1 Company that the Appellant has no locus standi under Section 230 (4) to object the scheme is accepted but this will not affect the power of Regional Director as there is no such limitation prescribed for the Regional Director to file his objections as he is a public authority and has to look after the interest of the public\/shareholders\/investors at large.<\/span><\/p>\n

Bench noted from the observations made by the Regional Director that there were irregularities and non-compliances that were present at the time of sanctioning of the scheme by the NCLT.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

Company must be in compliance of the provision of law and cannot act just on the basis of a legal opinion.<\/p>\n

The respondent 1 Company should have instantly rejected the application money for 10,375 shares as the Application applied were for less than the minimum lot size i.e. 100 shares.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Since the scheme appeared to be used as a course of action to rectify the irregularities previously done\/committed by respondent 1 company, grounds raised by the regional director for dismissing the petition was just and reasonable.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

Main objective behind the establishment of SEBI is to protect the interest of the investors and their hard-earned money trading in the stock exchanges, to regulate and facilitate efficient and flawless functioning of the securities market, to promote its development and to resolve the matters connected to it.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

NCLT overruled the objections of the Regional Director in view of the said being procedural in nature.<\/p>\n

Wrong Precedent<\/span><\/p>\n

For the above aspect, Bench stated that even if the objections were procedural in nature, it is the jurisdiction of the Tribunal that such procedural aspects need to be duly complied with before sanctioning of the scheme as it would lay down a wrong precedent which would allow companies to do whatever acts without the compliance and confirmation of the Court and other sectoral and regulatory authorities and thereafter get it ratified by the Court under the Umbrella of “scheme”.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Decision<\/span><\/h3>\n

Tribunal held that before the sanctioning of Scheme under Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013, no action should be pending against the company by the public authorities.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

It is the duty of the Tribunal or any Court that their Orders should encourage compliances and not defaults.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Hence, the appeal was allowed and the impugned order set aside. [Ashish O. Lalpuria v. Kumaka Industries Ltd., 2020 SCC OnLine NCLAT 676<\/b><\/a>, decided on 20-10-2020]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT):\u00a0A Division Bench of Justice Jarat Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Balvinder Singh (Technical Member) while addressing <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":153604,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[31714,29785,12521,43834,43833,2563],"class_list":["post-237751","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-companies-act-2013","tag-law","tag-nclt","tag-procedural-aspects","tag-scheme-of-arrangement","tag-SEBI"],"yoast_head":"\nNCLAT | If objections raised in regard to "Scheme" under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to "Scheme" under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT):\u00a0A Division Bench of Justice Jarat Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Balvinder Singh (Technical Member) while addressing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-10-20T10:58:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-11-06T07:17:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"844\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/\",\"name\":\"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to \\\"Scheme\\\" under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-10-20T10:58:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-11-06T07:17:43+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":844},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to “Scheme” under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to \"Scheme\" under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to \"Scheme\" under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds","og_description":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT):\u00a0A Division Bench of Justice Jarat Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Balvinder Singh (Technical Member) while addressing","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-10-20T10:58:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-11-06T07:17:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":844,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/","name":"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to \"Scheme\" under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","datePublished":"2020-10-20T10:58:52+00:00","dateModified":"2020-11-06T07:17:43+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","width":1330,"height":844},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/nclat-if-objections-raised-in-regard-to-scheme-under-s-230-of-companies-act-2013-are-procedural-in-nature-can-they-be-overruled-tribunal-expounds\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"NCLAT | If objections raised in regard to “Scheme” under S. 230 of Companies Act, 2013 are procedural in nature, can they be overruled? Tribunal expounds"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":221560,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/nclat-law-on-maintainability-of-compromise-and-arrangement-application-by-promoter-during-pendency-of-liquidation-under-ibc-clarified\/","url_meta":{"origin":237751,"position":0},"title":"NCLAT | Law on maintainability of Compromise and Arrangement application by Promoter during pendency of Liquidation under IBC clarified","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Bench of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhyay, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial), set aside the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata, for failure to notice the correct position of law regarding maintainability of application under Sections 230 to 232 of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":326323,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/11\/procedural-orders-directing-consolidation-of-related-petitions-not-appealable-under-section-421-of-companies-act-nclat-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":237751,"position":1},"title":"Procedural orders directing consolidation of related petitions not appealable under Section 421 of Companies Act: NCLAT","author":"Ritu","date":"July 11, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The NCLAT criticized the appellants for unnecessarily burdening the Tribunal with excessive documentation, voluminous records and citations of little value, thereby wasting Tribunal\u2019s resources and acting contrary to professional ethics.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/resolution-plan.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/resolution-plan.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/resolution-plan.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/resolution-plan.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":245675,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/16\/ineligible-promoters-under-section-29a-ibc-cant-propose-compromise-or-arrangement-schemes-under-section-230-of-the-companies-act-2013-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":237751,"position":2},"title":"Ineligible promoters under Section 29A IBC can’t propose compromise or arrangement schemes under Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 16, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe purpose of the ineligibility under Section 29A is to achieve a sustainable revival and to ensure that a person who is the cause of the problem either by a design or a default cannot be a part of the process of solution.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253943,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/09\/no-bar-in-merging-unhealthy-company-with-healthy-company\/","url_meta":{"origin":237751,"position":3},"title":"NCLAT | \u2018Till further orders\u2019, not in order — No bar in merging unhealthy company with healthy company to succour","author":"Editor","date":"September 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Coram of Justice Jarat Kumar Jain, Judicial Member and Ashok Kumar Mishra, Technical Member while disposing of an appeal challenging an impugned order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench. Kolkata stated, \u201cThere is no bar in merging unhealthy company with healthy\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":208139,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/15\/nclat-no-appeal-against-reference-of-arbitration-lies-under-section-421-of-companies-act-2013\/","url_meta":{"origin":237751,"position":4},"title":"NCLAT | No appeal against reference of arbitration lies under Section 421 of Companies Act, 2013","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 15, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Bench of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, member (Judicial) dismissed an appeal filed against the order of National Company Law Law Tribunal (Bengaluru). By the impugned order, application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":246088,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/25\/arrangements\/","url_meta":{"origin":237751,"position":5},"title":"NCLAT | NCLT has the discretion to modify arrangements, but only when cogent; Otherwise deemed unwarranted","author":"Editor","date":"March 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A Coram of Justice Jarat Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Kanthi Narahari (Technical Member) accepted an appeal holding the impugned order, modifying the date of appointment, to be unwarranted. In the present appeal, the appellant under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/237751","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=237751"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/237751\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/153604"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=237751"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=237751"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=237751"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}