Rizwan Ahmad & Anr vs Sojitz India Pvt Ltd & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a corporate insolvency resolution process has been triggered by admission of an operational creditor's application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, but no Committee of Creditors has yet been constituted, a party may approach the Tribunal directly for withdrawal or settlement of the claim, and the Tribunal may, in the exercise of its inherent powers under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, allow or disallow such withdrawal or settlement after hearing all concerned parties and considering all relevant factors on the facts of the case. Where the Tribunal permits withdrawal of a Section 9 application on the basis of a settlement reached before the constitution of the Committee of Creditors, it may set aside the admission order, the moratorium, and the actions of the Interim Resolution Professional taken under it, and release the corporate debtor from the rigours of the process, subject to the settling party's compliance with the terms of settlement, failing which the creditor may seek contempt proceedings or revival of the insolvency process.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Rizwan Ahmad & Anr. ...Appellants
Vs.
M/s. Sojitz India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellants: - Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ranjana Roy Gawai and Mr. Parvinder Tanwar, Advocates.
For Respondents: - Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Saket Sukla, Mr. Vasanth Rajasekaran and Ms. Soumya AK., Advocates.
O R D E R
11.03.2019─ This appeal has been preferred by the Appellants- Mr.
Rizwan Ahmad & Anr., Shareholder and Director of 'M/s. Oren
Hydrocarbons Private Limited'- ('Corporate Debtor') against the order
dated 12th February, 2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National
Company Law Tribunal), Division Bench, Chennai, whereby and
whereunder, the application preferred under Section 9 of the Insolvency
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code" for short) filed by 'M/s. Sojitz
India Private Limited'- ('Operational Creditor') has been admitted, order
of 'Moratorium' has been passed and 'Interim Resolution Professional'
has been appointed.
2
2. On 22nd February, 2019, when the matter was taken up, following
order was passed:
"22.02.2019 According to counsel for the
Appellant, the relationship between the parties is
not that of 'Corporate Debtor' or the 'Operational
Creditor' but as a business partner. Further,
according to him, there is a pre-existing dispute.
Learned counsel further submits that the
Appellants are ready to settle the claim with the
first Respondent and time should be allowed for
such settlement, as the Interim Resolution
Professional has not yet constituted the Committee
of Creditors'.
Mr. Vasant Rajshekharan, Advocate accepts
notice on behalf of 1st Respondent. No further
notice need be issued to him. The first Respondent
may file reply-affidavit within 7 days. Rejoinder,
if any, be filed within 7 days thereof.
Let notice be issued on rest of the
Respondent by speed post and by Dasti. Requisite
along with process fee, if not filed, be filed by 25th
February, 2019. If the appellants provide the e-
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019 3
mail address of rest of the respondent, let notice
be also issued through e-mail.
Post the case 'for Orders' on 11th March,
2019.
Until further order, the Interim Resolution
professional will not constitute Committee of
Creditors, if not constituted, to enable the
Appellants to settle the claim with the first
Respondent.
However, the Interim Resolution Professional
(IRP) will ensure that the company remains going
concern and the manufacturing and production of
the company do not suffer; payment of wages to
the employees/ workmen are made on time and if
any material is supplied during corporate
resolution process, the payment should be paid to
the supplier/ creditor. The Insolvency Resolution
Professional will also take aid of (suspended)
Board of Directors and the officers and the
employees. The Banks having account of the
corporate debtor will also cooperate with the
Insolvency Resolution Professional to ensure
compliance of this order."
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019 4
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants submits
that the matter has been settled by agreement dated 8th March, 2019
prior to the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'. It is also accepted
by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent-
('Operational Creditor').
4. The 'Terms of Settlement' of the agreement has been enclosed in
terms of which the amount will be paid by the Appellant to the
'Operational Creditor' in terms of clause 1.1 of the settlement agreement,
which reads as follows:
"1.1 OREN hereby undertakes and confirms that
it shall, and RA and RK hereby undertake and
assure SJI that they shall take all such actions
as may be necessary to ensure that OREN pays
an amount of INR 24,27,64,004 ("Settlement
Amount") to SJI, without any deductions,
reductions or set-offs whatsoever, in the
respective amounts set out in the second column
of the following table (each such amount being
referred to as "Instalment") and in the
scheduled dates set out against each Instalment
in third column of the following (each such
amount being referred to as "Due Date"):
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019 5
S.No. Instalment (INR) Due Date
1. 7,00,00,000 ("First Instalment") 8 April 2019
2. 6,00,00,000 ("Second Instalment") 8 May 2019 (if such day is not a business day for banks in New Delhi (Business Day) then the next Business Day
3. 6,00,00,000 ("Third Instalment") 7 June 2019 (if such day is not a Business Day for banks in New Delhi then the next Business Day)
4. 5,27,64,004 ("Final Instalment") 8 July 2019 (if such day is not a Business Day for banks in New Delhi then the next Business Day)
5. In the case of "Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union of India
& Ors.', Writ Petition (Civil) No. 99/2018 (2019 SCC OnLine SC 73)",
the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed and held:
"52. It is clear that once the Code gets triggered
by admission of a creditor's petition under
Sections 7 to 9, the proceeding that is before the
Adjudicating Authority, being a collective
proceeding, is a proceeding in rem. Being a
proceeding in rem, it is necessary that the body
which is to oversee the resolution process must
be consulted before any individual corporate
debtor is allowed to settle its claim. A question
arises as to what is to happen before a
committee of creditors is constituted (as per the
timelines that are specified, a committee of
creditors can be appointed at any time within
30 days from the date of appointment of the
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019 6
interim resolution professional). We make it
clear that at any stage where the committee of
creditors is not yet constituted, a party can
approach the NCLT directly, which Tribunal
may, in exercise of its inherent powers under
Rule11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, allow or
disallow an application for withdrawal or
settlement. This will be decided after hearing
all the concerned parties and considering all
relevant factors on the facts of each case."
6. In view of the aforesaid fact, while we are not going into the
question of relationship between the 'Corporate Debtor' and the
Respondents or whether there was a pre-existence of dispute or not, allow
the prayer of the Respondents to withdraw the application in view of the
agreement reached subject to compliance of the agreement by the
Appellants.
7. In the circumstances, while we direct the parties particularly the
Appellants to comply with the 'Terms of Settlement' dated 8th March,
2019 and pay the amount within the period as mentioned therein, we set
aside the impugned order dated 12th February, 2019 passed by the
Adjudicating Authority and dispose of the application under Section 9
filed by the 'Operational Creditor' as withdrawn.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019 7
8. In effect, order (s), passed by the Adjudicating Authority declaring
moratorium and action, if any, taken by the 'Interim Resolution
Professional' all such orders and actions are set aside. The 'Corporate
Debtor' (company) is released from all the rigour of law and is allowed to
function independently through its Board of Directors with immediate
effect.
9. The matter is remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for
determination of the fee of the 'Interim Resolution Professional'; the
'Corporate Debtor' will pay the same.
10. We make it clear that in case agreement is not complied with in its
letter and spirit, it will be open to the Respondents not only to file a
petition for contempt for flouting the direction of this Appellate Tribunal,
it will also be open to the Respondents to revive the prayer for any
proceeding under 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' and request
this Appellate Tribunal to recall the order and to dismiss the appeal for
non-compliance.
The appeal stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and
directions. No cost.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice A.I.S. Cheema) Member(Judicial) Ar/g
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 170 of 2019
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