2018 (10) TMI 776

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (Judicial) For The Appellant : Mr. C. S. Gupta, Ms. Kritika and Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Advocates For The Respondents : Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Advocate ORDER This appeal has been preferred by Shareholder and Ex-Director of 'M/s Soho Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor) against order dated 14th June, 2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi (Court No .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent submits that previously the Respondent attempted to serve on the demand notice but it was retuned undelivered. 3. However, it is not in dispute and evidence is also on record to show that the demand notice under section 8(1) notice was never served on the Corporate Debtor. 4. On 27th August, 2018, when the matter was taken up, learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that if the demand no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... impugned order dated 14th June, 2018. The case is not remitted parties have settled the claim. 7. In effect, order(s) passed by the Adjudicating Authority appointing 'Resolution Professional', declaring moratorium, freezing of account, and all other order(s) passed pursuant to impugned order and action taken by the 'Resolution Professional', including the advertisement published in the newspaper .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X