Pravin Arjun Patel vs J K Lakshmi Cement Ltd

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI I.A. No.777 & 778 of 2018 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 264 of 2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Pravin Arjun Patel (Through Mr. Ravikant Seth) ...Appellants Vs J K Lakshmi Cement Ltd. ....Respondents Present: For Appellants: Mr. Santosh Kumar, Mr. Sanjeev Arora and Mr. Kailash Chandra, Advocate For Respondents: ORDER

12.06.2018: The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submit that the

application under Section 9 was admitted without observation with the

principle of natural justice.

The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submit that during the pendency of

the case both the parties have arrived at a settlement to which the learned

counsel for the respondents does not object. He admits he has received the

payment and nothing is pending now. Interest of the Interim Resolution

Professional is also taken care of by the respondents and there is no issue

on that account.

Reference was made to decision of this tribunal vide order dated

02.06.2017 in the matter of "Agroh Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

Narmada Construction (Indore) P Ltd."

"We also heard the parties as to whether remand of the

case after setting aside the impugned order will be futile or not

if otherwise the application is complete. In this regard the

learned counsel for the parties submitted that they have settled 2

the dispute and if the impugned order is set aside on the

ground violation of principle of natural justice the respondent

will withdraw the application. In view of such suggestions

made on behalf of the parties and that the impugned order and

give liberty to the respondent to withdraw the application filed

under Section 9 of I&B Code.

In the result, the appointment of Interim Resolution

Professional, order declaring moratorium, freezing of account

and all other order passed by Adjudicating Authority pursuant

to impugned order and action taken by the Interim Resolution

Professional including the advertisement published in the

newspaper calling for applications are declared illegal. The

Adjudicating Authority may allow the operational creditor to

withdraw the application and close the proceeding. The

appellant is released from the rigour of law and allow the

appellant company to function independently through its Board

of Directors.

The Appeal stands disposed of with the aforesaid

observations."

The decision of the NCLT, Principal Bench, New Delhi is set

aside. And in view of the settlement of the parties are allowed to

withdraw Section 9 application.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 264 of 2017 3

Vide this Tribunal order dated 30th May, 2018 in the matter

the appeal is listed on 2nd July, 2018 may not be listed on that date

as the matter stands disposed of today.

(Balvinder Singh) Member (Technical) sh/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 264 of 2017