Phool Chand Goel vs Avneet Goyal & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an application under Section 9 of the I&B Code has been settled between the operational creditor and the corporate debtor's promoter before the Committee of Creditors is constituted, and the operational creditor accepts the settlement before the Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal may, in exercise of its power under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 and in line with the Supreme Court's decision in Swiss Ribbons, set aside the admission order, dispose of the Section 9 application as withdrawn, and release the corporate debtor from the corporate insolvency resolution process. An intervention application by a creditor who has filed a claim is not a bar to such a settlement-based disposal where the interim resolution professional has not accepted that claim, and the Tribunal will not adjudicate disputed claim amounts in that appeal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 [Arising out of Order dated 7th November, 2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi (Court No.IV) in Company Petition No. IB-543/ND/2019]
IN THE MATTER OF: Sh. Phool Chand Goyal Ex. Director/ Shareholder R/o 2131/1, Nai Basti, narela, Delhi-110040. ....Appellant
Vs
1. Avneet Goyal Prop. Of M/s R.B. Enterprises Having office at: 4064, Naya Bazar, Delhi-110006.
2. M/s Black Diamond Pulses Pvt. Ltd. Having registered office at: 2131/1, Nai Basti,Narela, Delhi-110040. Through its IRP Mahesh Tane. ....Respondents
Present:
For Appellant: Mr. Vikas Mishra, Mr. Ajay Kumar and Mr. Himanshu Singh, Advocates.
For Respondents: Mr. Hitesh Sachar, Advocate for IRP with Mr. Mahesh Taneja, IRP (R-2).
Mr. Madhusudan Sharma, Advocate for Intervenor.
JUDGMENT
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.
M/s R.B. Enterprises ('Operational Creditor') - 1st Respondent moved
an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
(hereinafter referred to as the 'I&B Code') against M/s Black Diamond Pulses
Private Limited ('Corporate Debtor'). The Adjudicating Authority (National
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 1 of 7 Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi (Court No.IV) by order dated
7th November, 2019 admitted the application.
2. The present Appeal has been presented by the Appellant on the ground
that the Appellant has settled the matter with the 'Operational Creditor' prior
to the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors' and, therefore, to pass
appropriate order exercising inherent power under Rule 11 of the NCLAT
Rules, 2016. The 'Operational Creditor' has appeared and accepted that the
parties have settled prior to the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'.
The parties were noticed and they have appeared. The Settlement Term
reached on 27th November, 2019 has been enclosed by the Appellant. The
learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant will take care
of the fee and cost incurred by the 'Interim Resolution Professional'.
3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 'Interim Resolution
Professional' submitted that 'Committee of Creditors' was constituted on
28th November 2019, which was communicated to the Adjudicating
Authority on 3rd December, 2019.
4. It has been brought to our notice that the same very impugned order
was challenged by one Mr. Rahul Goel, another 'Operational Creditor' in
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1356 of 2019, which was withdrawn
on 26th November, 2019 from this Appellate Tribunal with liberty to approach
the 'Operational Creditor' for negotiations and to arrive at an amicable
settlement, which is as under:-
"After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the Appellant offered to withdraw the appeal as according to him Appellant is desirous of settling the dispute with the
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 2 of 7 Respondent (Operational Creditor). Learned counsel for the Respondent (Operational Creditor) is present and submits that the Respondent (Operational Creditor) is not averse to settlement being reached between the parties.
In view of the same, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. The Appellant shall be at liberty to approach the Respondent (Operational Creditor) for negotiations so as to arrive at an amicable settlement.
I.A. No. 3862 of 2019 seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order stands disposed of with direction to the Appellant to file the certified copy of impugned order within a week."
5. Mr. Avneet Goyal, Proprietor of M/s. R.B. Enterprises ('Operational
Creditor') appeared through Mr. Abhishek Tandon, Chartered Accountant,
who accepted that the Agreement has been reached.
6. The Agreement dated 27th November, 2019 is on India Non Judicial
Stamp Paper issued by National Capital Territory of Delhi. The e-Stamp is
dated 27th November, 2019, is extracted below: -
"SETTLEMENT DEED
THIS SETTLEMENT DEED made dated and effective as of the 27/11/2019 is made,
BETWEEN
AVNEET GOYAL, PROP. M/S R.B. ENTERPRISES, Office at 4064, Naya Bazar, Delhi-100006, herein after referred to as the FIRST PARTY AND
SH. PHOOL CHAND, SHAREHOLDER OF M/S BLACK DIAMOND PULSES PRIVATE LIMITED, office at 2131/1,
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 3 of 7 Nai Basti, Narela, Delhi-110040 herein after referred to as the SECOND PARTY.
WHEREAS vide order dated 07.11.2019 of National Company Law Tribunal, the Hon'ble bench had appointed Mr. Mahesh Taneja having registration No.IBBI/IPA-002/IP-N00739/2019-2019/12326 as the IRP of the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor company (M/S Black Diamond Pulses Private Limited).
WHEREAS an appeal dated 25.11.2019 had filed in NCLAT against the order dated 07.11.2019 and in compliance of the order dated 25.11.2019 both the parties have agreed to settle the entire dispute. IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. THAT the SECOND PARTY and FIRST PARTY have amicably settled the entire dispute for a total sum of Rs.1582410.10 Cheque No.954059 (Punjab and Sing Bank) against all the claim/ damages/ compensation etc.
2. That the Second party has made the entire payment of Rs.1582410.10 Cheque No.954059 (Punjab and Sing Bank) to the first party as full and final settlement.
3. Both the parties agree and undertake that by entering into this agreement, no other legal action/ complaint/ case/ petition shall be initiate by either of them against each other.
4. That the parties hereto voluntarily agreed and this settlement has not been obtained by force/coercion/ undue Influence.
5. That the contents of the abovesaid settlement agreement have been read over, explained and
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 4 of 7 understood by both the parties in vernacular language and both the parties have agreed to the same in the presence of witness and the same shall be binding upon both the parties.
6. That this Memorandum of Settlement has been voluntarily executed by the parties in their full senses, without any pressure, threat or coercion from any corner and this memorandum of Settlement is binding on all the parties, their legal heirs, successors etc. these deposition of the parties can also be placed before any court of law or any other authority.
7. That the first party hereby withdraw all its claims against the Second Party and First Part undertakes to assist the Second Party before NCLT/ NCLAT for quashing/ setting aside/ removal of IRP.
IN WITNESSES WHEREOF, both the parties have put their respective hands on this memorandum of Settlement signed at Delhi on the date first mentioned above, in presence of following witness this agreement on the 27, November and 2019 first written above"
7. One Intervention Application has been filed by one Mr. Rishu Goyal,
Proprietor of Shaurya Impex, opposing the prayer on the ground that it has
also filed claim. From the pleadings made by the Intervener - Rishu Goyal,
Proprietor of Shaurya Impex, we find that after the impugned order dated
7th November, 2019, a public announcement was made on 11th November,
2019. According to the Intervener, he filed claim before the 'Interim
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 5 of 7 Resolution Professional' on 19th November, 2019. However, the 'Interim
Resolution Professional' asked for additional documents on 2nd December,
2019. Subsequently, by email dated 13th December, 2019 'Interim
Resolution Professional' informed that the claim is not legally tenable on oral
agreement. Therefore, we are not inclined to deliberate on the issue with
regard to the claim of the Intervener. Intervention Application further shows
that a suit is pending before the District Judge with regard to outstanding
dues and there is allegation that details of ledger attached therein were not
proper. Such issues cannot be determined particularly when 'Interim
Resolution Professional' has not accepted the claim. Admittedly, this
Appellate Tribunal by order dated 26th November, 2019 noticed the prayer
made by one of the Shareholder/ Promoter that it intends to settle and
allowed the Promoter to settle the matter with the 'Operational Creditor'. The
settlement was reached by next day as evident from Stamp Paper dated 27th
November, 2019. The 'Committee of Creditors' was constituted thereafter on
28th November, 2019, about which the Adjudicating Authority was informed
on 3rd December, 2019. Therefore, we find that the Promoters settled the
matter with the 'Operational Creditor' prior to constitution of the 'Committee
of Creditors' on 27th November, 2019 in view of the liberty given by the
Appellate Tribunal.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in "Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India &
Ors. - Writ Petition (Civil) No. 99 of 2018", we in exercise of power
conferred by Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 set-aside the impugned order
dated 7th November, 2019 and dispose of the application under Section 9 of
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 6 of 7 the I&B Code filed by M/s R.B. Enterprises ('Operational Creditor') as
withdrawn. In the result, the 'Corporate Debtor' is released from all the rigors
of 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process'. The 'Interim Resolution
Professional' will handover the assets and records to the Promoters. We
assess the fee of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' @ Rs.1,00,000/- per
month. The 'Interim Resolution Professional' will forward the 'Corporate
Insolvency Resolution Process' cost incurred by it for publication etc. and the
fee payable to it as per our decision to the Appellant/ Promoters/ 'Corporate
Debtor', who will pay the same within three weeks.
The Appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations. No costs.
[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial)
NEW DELHI
7th February, 2020
Ash
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1393 of 2019 Page 7 of 7
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