AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 176 wordsToday Mr. Himanshu Dhawan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted on instructions that the petitioner company is suffering a proceeding under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and though said proceeding had been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 12.1.2021, the stay now stands vacated in view of final judgement and order dated 30.9.2021 whereby the issue of limitation appears to have been remitted back for fresh consideration. The stand of Mr. Dhawan is that he had been instructed to appear and file an MA by the Management of the company who are no longer authorised to represent the company on account of appointment of Resolution Professional (RP).
Mr. Tamta, learned counsel for the respondent submits that order appointing Resolution Professional (RP) or IRP and also the order imposing moratorium should be brought on record if effective order is to be passed on account of the company not being represented by a proper lawful management. For that, Mr. Dhruv Tamta prays for a short adjournment.
List the matter under the same head on 8.12.2021.