Mr. G. Rama Manohar Reddy vs Sei Trading India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors

G. Rama Manohar Reddy ...Appellant

Vs.

SEI Trading India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Rakesh Kr. Khanna, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sudhir Naagar, Advocate.

For Respondents: -Mr. Mirza Aslam Beg and Ms. Chandni Arora, Advocates.

ORDER

19.09.2018─ This appeal has been preferred by Mr. G. Rama

Manohar Reddy, Shareholder of 'M/s. Aishwarya Technology & Telecom

Limited'- ('Corporate Debtor') challenging the order dated 31st July, 2018

passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal),

Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder, the application

under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('I&B Code'

for short) preferred by the Respondents- 'SEI Trading India Private

Limited' has been admitted, order of 'Moratorium' has been passed and

'Interim Resolution Professional' has been appointed.

2. The appeal was preferred on the ground that there was a pre-

existing dispute as Civil Suit O.S. No. 492 of 2017 was pending before

the Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. -2-

3. Today when the matter was taken up, it was brought to our notice

that the parties have reached settlement and settlement deed has been

signed by the parties on 18th September, 2018.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent no. 1 while

do not dispute that Civil Suit between the parties was pending prior to

issuance of notice under Section 8 (1) of the 'I&B Code', also accepts that

the Respondent no.1 has settled the matter with the Appellant. In view of

the aforesaid position, the impugned order dated 31st July, 2018 passed

by the Adjudicating Authority is set aside.

5. In effect, order (s), passed by the Adjudicating Authority appointing

any 'Resolution Professional', declaring moratorium, freezing of account,

and all other order (s) passed by the Adjudicating Authority pursuant to

impugned order and action, if any, taken by the 'Resolution Professional',

including the advertisement, published in the newspaper calling for

applications all such orders and actions are declared illegal and are set

aside. The application preferred by Respondent no.1 under Section 9 of

the I&B Code, 2016 is dismissed. Learned Adjudicating Authority will

now close the proceeding. The appellant 'Corporate Debtor' (company) is

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

independently through its Board of Directors from immediate effect.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 457 of 2018 -3-

6. The Adjudicating Authority will fix the fee of the 'Resolution

Professional' and the 'Corporate Debtor' will pay the fees for the period he

has functioned. The appeal is allowed with aforesaid observation and

direction. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there

shall be no order as to cost.

Let the copy of the Settlement Deed be kept on record.

(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson

(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial) Ar/uk

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 457 of 2018