In the matter of Forcefox Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
- CitationIA No.554-2023 in CP (IB) No.89-Chd-Hry-2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority may permit withdrawal of an application admitted under Section 9 of the Code, under Section 12-A, after the Interim Resolution Professional has been appointed but before a Committee of Creditors is constituted, where the withdrawal is supported by a settlement and payment in full and final satisfaction of the operational creditor's claim, and the application for withdrawal is not opposed by the corporate debtor. Upon such withdrawal, the moratorium under Section 14 of the Code comes to an end, the corporate debtor is discharged from the claims in respect of the petition and is freed from the Code and the Regulations made thereunder, the Interim Resolution Professional stands discharged, and the suspended Board of Directors is restored to its original position.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, CHANDIGARH Item No.24 IA No.554/2023 In CP (IB) No.89/Chd/Hry/2020 (admitted) Under Section 9, 12-A, IBC 2016 In the matter of:- Prime Papyrus Products Pvt Ltd. …Petitioner-Operational Creditor Vs. Forcefox Technologies Private Ltd. …Respondent-Corporate Debtor Present: Mr. GS Bhatia, Advocate for the applicant-operational creditor. Mr. Harkirat Singh, Advocate for Suspended Board of Director of Corporate Debtor. IA No.554/2023 The present IA No.554/2023 has been filed by operational creditor under Section 12-A of the Code for withdrawal of the petition under Section 9 of the Code and for withdrawal of the CIRP which was ordered by this Bench on 01.02.2023. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that no CoC has been constituted so far and fee of IRP which was ordered to be paid on 01.02.2023 to the tune of Rs.80,000/- has been paid. The copy of bank account has been placed on record with the application. So far maintainability of the application by operational creditor instead of IRP under Section 12-A is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the order dated 06.02.2023 passed by the Hon’ble NCLAT in Company Appeal (AT)
IA No.554/2023 In CP (IB) No.89/Chd/Hry/2020 (admitted)
(Insolvency) No.1017 of 2022 titled as Sandeep Kukkar Vs. Siddarth Intercrafts Pvt. Ltd. and in that case an application was filed by the Suspended Director on the basis of the settlement agreement. In the case in hand, settlement agreement dated 06.02.2023 has been placed on record wherein an amount of Rs.16 lakhs has been paid by Suspended Director as full and final payment through the demand draft bearing No.999989 dated 06.02.2023. Learned counsel for the respondent has stated that he has no objection if the present application is allowed. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned above, the IA No.554/2023 is allowed and disposed of accordingly and CP(IB) No.89/Chd/Hry/2020 is dismissed as withdrawn. As a consequence moratorium declared under Section 14 of the code comes to an end and the corporate debtor is discharged from the claims in lieu of the said petition and is free from the rigours of the Code and Regulations made thereunder. Henceforth, the IRP is discharged and the suspended board of Director is restored to its original position.
SD/- Sd/- (Subrata Kumar Dash) (Harnam Singh Thakur) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial) March 02, 2023 DS
IA No.554/2023 In CP (IB) No.89/Chd/Hry/2020 (admitted)
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