Girdhari Lal Khandelwal vs Chemical Suppliers India Private ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1216 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may close the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and set aside the admission order under Section 9 where the parties have settled and the operational creditor and corporate debtor have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding placed on record before the Tribunal, rendering continuation of the CIRP unnecessary. Where the Insolvency Resolution Professional has not been paid his fees and has incurred expenses in the CIRP, the Tribunal may direct payment of a fixed sum to the IRP as part of the disposal of the appeal, having regard to the facts of the case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Girdhari Lal Khandelwal ...Appellant
Versus
Chemical Suppliers India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Kaushal Gautam and Ms. Snehpreet Kaur, Advocates. For Respondents : Ms. Mehak Agarwal and Mr. Kapil Sharma, Advocate for OC. Mr. Varun Jain, Advocate for IRP.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
05.07.2024: This appeal has been filed against order dated 14.06.2024
by which order the Adjudicating Authority has admitted Section 9 application
filed by the Operational Creditor (Respondent herein). The order was passed
on 14.06.2024 and this Tribunal on 01.07.2024 passed following order:
"ORDER (Hybrid Mode)
1.7.2024- Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that settlement has already been entered with the Operational Creditor and he seeks three days' time to bring the settlement on record.
List on 5th July, 2024.
In the meantime, Committee of Creditors shall not be constituted and the Order impugned shall remain stayed."
Cont'd.../ 2
2. Appellant has brought on record Memorandum of Understanding dated
02.07.2024 under which the settlement has been entered between the
Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor. Learned counsel for the
Respondent submits that they have already settled and CIRP need not be
continued.
3. In view of the Memorandum of Understanding on record, we close the
CIRP and set aside order dated 14.06.2024.
4. Learned counsel for the IRP submits that he has not been paid any
amount although the Adjudicating Authority has directed for payment of Rs.1
Lakhs. He further submits that IRP has also incurred certain expenses in the
CIRP.
5. In facts of the present case, we are of the view that amount of Rs.2
Lakhs be paid to the IRP, which may be paid by way of a Bank Draft or RTGS
within two weeks from today.
6. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1216 of 2024
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