- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
SC Orders Status Quo In Plea Challenging Bombay HC Order Quashing Attachment Of 63 Moons Technologies’ Assets
The Supreme Court has asked to maintain status quo on a plea which had challenged a Bombay High Court order until the final hearing in the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Maharashtra government and others.The plea had challenged the Bombay High Court order quashing attachment of assets of 63 Moons Technologies Limited under the Maharashtra Protection of Investors Deposits...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Supreme Court has asked to maintain status quo on a plea which had challenged a Bombay High Court order until the final hearing in the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Maharashtra government and others.
The plea had challenged the Bombay High Court order quashing attachment of assets of 63 Moons Technologies Limited under the Maharashtra Protection of Investors Deposits (MPID) Act.
Earlier, the Maharashtra government had filed a special leave petition asking for a stay on the Bombay High Court order, which the Supreme Court refused.
The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for November 27.
It may be recalled that the Bombay High Court had struck down the Maharashtra government's order to attach properties worth Rs 2,500 crore of 63 Moons Technologies (formerly Financial Technologies India or FTIL) in the Rs 5,600-crore payment default of 2013 at its then subsidiary, National Spot Exchange (NSEL). The verdict came as a major relief for 63 Moons Technologies.
The attachment was made by Mumbai city police's economic offences wing (EOW), which probed the case, on behalf of the State of Maharashtra.