NCLAT says brief DD lapse did not vitiate CIRP process
In short
NCLAT said a short delay in depositing the DD was not a serious mistake that could spoil the CIRP process. The summary says the Resolution Professional’s lapse was accidental, small, and did not slow the process or help anyone.
This matters because the insolvency process can stay in place. The report does not say how much the DD was or who the case involved.
What the reporting says
NCLAT held that non-deposition of the DD for some time was not a material irregularity that could vitiate the CIRP process. The publisher-supplied summary says the Resolution Professional’s lapse was inadvertent, minor and did not delay completion or favor any party. The immediate consequence is that the CIRP remains unaffected, while the reporting does not identify the DD amount or the parties involved.
Why it matters
NCLAT ruled that non-deposition of the DD for some time was not a material irregularity capable of vitiating the CIRP process. The summary says the Resolution Professional’s lapse was inadvertent, minor and did not delay completion or benefit any party. The ruling preserves the insolvency process, but the available reporting does not specify the DD amount, the company, or the related parties.