Mother Pride Dairy India Pvt. Ltd vs Portrait Advertising & Marketing Pvt. ...

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 94 of 2017 (Under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against order dated 27.06.2017 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench-in C.P.(IB) No.60/(PB)/2017)

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mother Pride Dairy India Pvt. Ltd. .Appellant

Versus

Portrait Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. .Respondent

Present: For Appellant: - Shri Surabh Kalia, Ms... Samridhi Gogia, Advocates.

For Respondent :- Shri Akshay Sapra and Shri Jaideep Singh, Advocates.

ORDER

13.07.2017 The appellant has challenged the order dated 27th June, 2017 passed

by Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi in C.P.

No.(IB)-60(PB)/20 17, whereby the application preferred by respondent -

Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

(I&B Code, 2016) has been admitted and order of moratorium has been ordered.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the

appellant is negotiating with the respondent to settle the dispute. However, that•

cannot be a ground to interfere with the impugned order in absence of any illegality.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Operational Creditor next contended

that the parties have, in fact, settled the dispute and payment has been made.

However, it is not in dispute that the settlement has been made after admission of

the application under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016. In view of Rule 8 of 2

Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016, it was open to the

Operational Creditor to withdraw the application under Section 9 before its

admission but once it was admitted, it cannot be withdrawn even by the Operational

Creditor, as other creditors are entitled to raise claim pursuant to public

announcement under Section 15 read with Section 18 of the I&B Code, 2016.

For the reason afore and in absence of any merit, the appeal cannot be

allowed. The prayer as made is accordingly rejected.

However, we make it clear that the impugned order passed by learned

Adjudicating Authority, Principal Bench New Delhi or this order passed by the

Appellate Authority will not come in the way of the appellant to satisfy and settle

the claim of other creditors. If the appellant satisfies the claim of other creditors,

whoever has made claim, in that case Insolvency Resolution Professional will bring

the matter to the notice of learned Adjudicating Authority for closure of the

resolution process. The learned Adjudicating Authority in. such case will consider

the case in accordance with law, even before completion of Resolution process and

may close the matter.

The Appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid observation. No cost.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Balvinder Singh Member (Technical)

/aks/