Amit Khaneja & Anr vs Charu Chandra Nirmal & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1505 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the parties have settled the Section 7 application before the admission order is set aside, and the settlement is accepted by the financial creditor, the Interim Resolution Professional, and the Tribunal, the Appellate Tribunal may, under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, set aside the admission order and dispose of the Section 7 application as withdrawn, releasing the corporate debtor from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and returning its management to its promoters and directors.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Amit Khaneja & Anr. ...Appellant
Vs
Charu Chandra Nirmal & Anr. ....Respondents
Present: For Appellants: Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Mr. Aditya Shukla and Mr. Anurag Tandon, Advocates. For Respondents: Mr. Mohit Nandwani and Ms. Kritika Mehandirratta, Advocates for IRP. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Jain, IRP in person. ORDER
03.01.2020: 'Charu Chandra Nirmal' (Financial Creditor) moved application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'I&B Code') before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench Court No. VI, which has been admitted against 'M/s SVS Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor) by impugned order dated 17th December, 2019, against which present appeal has been preferred.
2. Earlier when the matter was taken up on 19th December, 2019, learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that Interim Resolution Professional has not made any publication nor constituted any Committee of Creditors and the Appellant has settled the matter with the Respondent - 'Charu Chandra Nirmal'.
3. On notice, Respondents have appeared including the Interim Resolution Professional. The Terms of Settlement dated 17th December, 2019 has been enclosed which suggest that on date of passing of impugned order, the Terms of Settlement was reached. This fact is also accepted by Ms. Kritika, Advocate who is appearing alsongwith Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jain, Interim Resolution Professional.
-2- 4. Mr. Charu Chandra Nirmal was also present before this Appellate Tribunal on 19th December, 2019 and accepted that such settlement has been reached. It is also recorded in Order dated 19th December, 2019. An affidavit to this effect has also been filed by him. In the Terms of Settlement, fee and cost incurred by the Interim Resolution Professional has been paid. This is also accepted by Mr. Rakesh Kr. Jain, Interim Resolution Professional.
5. In view of the aforesaid development and as we find that the parties had reached settlement on the date of admission of the application, we in exercise of power conferred under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 set aside the impugned order dated 17th December, 2019 and dispose of the application under Section 7 filed by 'Mr. Charu Chandra Nirmal' as withdrawn. The Corporate Debtor is released from the rigour of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and will function through its Promoters and Directors. The Interim Resolution Professional will hand over the records and premises to the Promoters/Directors of the Corporate Debtor. The Appeal is allowed with aforesaid observations and directions.
[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial) am/sk
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1505 of 2019
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free