9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Madhav Kanoria, Adv. Ms. Srideepa Bhattacharyya, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Gupta, Adv. Ms. Mishika Bajpai, Adv. Mr. Srinivasan Ramaswamy, Adv. M/S. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, AOR For the Respondent : Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AOR Mr. Shambo Nandy, Adv. Mr. Snehasish Mukherjee, AOR ORDER We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. The consolidated note of argument seem to refer too many issues but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Corporate Debtor. The share holding may have been more but the voting right is confined to 20 per cent and thus, this does not fall in the category of "more than 20 per cent" which would be disqualification under Section 5(24) of the Code. Apart from this, it is submitted that Section 21 has two provisos and the second proviso would apply in the case of the appellant. Thus, there is no disqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nancial creditor referred to in sub-section (6) or subsection (6A) or sub-section (5) of Section 24, if it is a related party of the corporate debtor, shall not have any right of representation, participation or voting in a meeting of the committee of creditors. Provided further that the first proviso shall not apply to a financial creditor, regulated by a financial sector regulator, if it is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e can be no cavil to the proposition that so far as the appellant before us is concerned, on account of both the aspects urged by learned senior counsel for the appellant, the appellant cannot be treated as a related party and thus, would find a place on the Committee of Creditors. Having opined so, insofar as the other aspects are concerned, which have not been dealt with by the NCLAT, it would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
