Wednesday, January 08, 2025 | 08:33 PM ISTEN Hindi

Home / Companies / News / NCLAT refuses to stay Piramal Group's resolution plan for DHFL

NCLAT refuses to stay Piramal Group's resolution plan for DHFL

A two-member bench presiding over the case said, "We do not think that any interim order as sought with regard to resolution plan approved needs to be passed."

Premium

63 Moon Technologies had moved the NCLAT against the NCLT’s approval of Piramal Group’s resolution plan. It holds around Rs 200 crore worth of non-convertible debentures (NCDs) issued by DHFL

Subrata Panda Mumbai

2 min read Last Updated : Jul 23 2021 | 9:52 PM IST

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on Friday refused to stay the resolution plan of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation (DHFL) and its subsequent takeover by Piramal Group over the plea filed by 63 Moons Technologies.

A two-member bench presiding over the case said, “We do not think that any interim order as sought with regard to resolution plan approved needs to be passed.”

Further, on the argument of 63 Moons Technologies that the execution of the plan should be the subject of the outcome of its appeals, the bench said, “...we have observed that it is a matter of law and

Topics : NCLAT Piramal Group DHFL 63 moons technologies

What you get on BS Premium?

Unlock 30+ premium stories daily hand-picked by our editors, across devices on browser and app.
Pick your 5 favourite companies, get a daily email with all news updates on them.
Full access to our intuitive epaper - clip, save, share articles from any device; newspaper archives from 2006.
Preferential invites to Business Standard events.
Curated newsletters on markets, personal finance, policy & politics, start-ups, technology, and more.

VIEW ALL FAQs

Need More Information - write to us at assist@bsmail.in

NCLAT refuses to stay Piramal Group's resolution plan for DHFL

A two-member ben­ch presiding over the case said, "We do not think that any int­erim order as sou­ght with regard to resolution plan app­roved needs to be passed."

A two-member bench presiding over the case said, "We do not think that any interim order as sought with regard to resolution plan approved needs to be passed."