VidhiAagaz
International Journal ofLaw Management & Humanities
ISSN 2581-5369 · Open access
International Journal ofLaw Management & Humanities
Open accessArticleVol. 4 No. V (2021)pp. 1805–1807

Difference in Treatment of Claim by the Liquidator and the IRP

SM
Soni MauryaStudent at Dr. Harisingh Gour University, Sagar (A Central University), M.P., India
View PDF
1,073views750downloads
Published 20 October 2021 · pp. 1805–1807 · Vol. 4 No. V (2021)
Abstract

In the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated under the I&B Code 2016 (Code), Claims are a very important concept in the IBC regime. Sections 18 and 25 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) lay down the duties of an interim resolution professional (IRP) and a resolution professional (RP) respectively. The provisions of Code strive on the protection of interest of creditors of a company which is under CIRP while completing the insolvency resolution process in a time-bound manner. The IBC is fortified with mechanisms to reduce and efficiently deal with the rejection of claims, creditors whose claims are rejected would continue to face prejudice.

Keywords
Resolution ProfessionalLiquidator & Interim Resolution Professional

How to cite

Soni Maurya, Difference in Treatment of Claim by the Liquidator and the IRP, 4 Int'l J. L. Mgmt. & Human. 1805 (2021).

Cite this article

Soni Maurya, Difference in Treatment of Claim by the Liquidator and the IRP, 4 Int'l J. L. Mgmt. & Human. 1805 (2021).
Chat with us