Datamatics Digital Ltd vs Sipani Online Pvt Ltd. Through The ...

Datamatics Digital Limited ...Appellant

Versus

Sipani Online Pvt. Ltd., Through the Interim Resolution Professional Konduru Prashanth Raju & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Karan Malhotra, Advocate

For 1st Respondent: Ms. Shilpa Gamnani, Advocate

For 2nd Respondent : Mr. Ramchandra Madan, Advocate

ORDER

16.03.2020 Application for impleadment of 'Promoter' /Director - Mr.

Punit Kumar Sipani filed in terms of Diary No. 18810 is taken on record and he

is impleaded as 2nd Respondent. I.A. No. 1120 of 2020 stands disposed of.

Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that in terms of 'Memorandum

of Settlement dated 30th December, 2019 parties have arrived at an amicable

settlement qua various claims/petitions/complaints including the subject

matter of proceedings before the learned Adjudicating Authority as also the

issues falling across the ambit of this appeal and agree to give a quietus to the

dispute resulting in initiation of 'corporate insolvency resolution process'. This

'Memorandum of Settlement' has been executed on 30th December, 2019

whereas the order of admission of application under Section 9 of the 'Insolvency 2

and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was passed on 18th July, 2019. It is, therefore,

evident that the settlement, inter-se, the parties was worked out and parties

arrived at settlement much prior to the constitution of the 'Committee of

Creditors'.

Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional - Ms. Shilpa Gamnani,

when asked, stated that the 'Committee of Creditors' has not been constituted

so far and there is no other claim filed before the Resolution Professional.

In this factual backdrop, we deem it proper to invoke our inherent powers

under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 to allow the parties to settle the dispute

which form the subject matter of proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority

as also the present appeal. The settlement terms are taken on record. As a

sequel thereto, the appeal is allowed.

In effect, order (s) passed by Ld. Adjudicating Authority appointing 'Interim

Resolution Professional', declaring moratorium and all other order (s) passed by

Adjudicating Authority pursuant to impugned order and action taken by the

'Resolution Professional' are set aside. The application preferred by the 1st

Respondent under Section 9 of the I&B Code is disposed of as withdrawn. The

Adjudicating Authority will now close the proceeding. The Respondent Company

is released from all the rigour of law and is allowed to function independently

through its Board of Directors from immediate effect.

The fees of the 'Resolution Professional', which is stated to have been fixed

at Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only), is enhanced to Rupees

Two Lakhs inclusive of the expenses incurred during the resolution process.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1211 of 2019 3

Since the learned counsel for the 'Resolution Professional' admits having

received Rs. 50,000/-, balance amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty

Thousand only) shall be paid by the Appellant (Operational Creditor) within two

weeks, failing which it shall be open to the 'Resolution Professional' to approach

learned Adjudicating Authority for revival of the proceedings and for recovering

her fees and costs incurred. This will be apart from the power of this Appellate

Tribunal being invoked for framing a rule against the Appellant (Operational

Creditor) for initiation of the contempt proceedings.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Acting Chairperson

[ Justice Anant Bijay Singh ] Member (Judicial)

[ Shreesha Merla ] Member (Technical)

/ns/rr/

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1211 of 2019