Skip to content

CS Professional · Corporate Restructuring, Valuation and Insolvency · Regulatory Approvals of Scheme

Kaveri Engineering Ltd's counsel argues that although Section 261 is omitted, a draft revival scheme sanctioned by the Tribunal under Section 262 can still be validly filed today. Which analysis best fits the official text of the Act?

The argument fails because Section 262, dealing with sanction of a revival scheme, was omitted with effect from 15 November 2016 along with Sections 254, 261, 263, 264 and 269. The entire revival and rehabilitation framework is no longer in the Act.

  1. ASection 262 remains valid because only Section 261 was omitted
  2. BSection 262 is valid only if the scheme was drafted before 2016
  3. CSection 262 applies if the company's debts are below a threshold
  4. DSection 262 is also omitted w.e.f. 15-11-2016, along with Sections 261 and 254, so the argument failsCorrect

Explanation

The official text shows Section 262 (sanction of scheme) omitted by s. 255 and the Eleventh Schedule w.e.f. 15-11-2016, together with Sections 254, 261, 263, 264 and 269. The whole revival framework is gone, so sanction cannot be sought under it.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Regulatory Approvals of Scheme shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Regulatory Approvals of SchemeFree diagnostic mock

More Regulatory Approvals of Scheme questions