Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Surender Vasudeva & Anr vs Crown Realtech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal7 March 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where the financial creditor and the corporate debtor have settled the claim before the Adjudicating Authority's admission order and the settlement is finalised before the Committee of Creditors is constituted, the admission of the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 may be set aside, the application permitted to be withdrawn, and the consequential moratorium, freezing orders and actions of the Interim Resolution Professional annulled, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 797 of 2018IN THE MATTER OF:

Surender Vasudeva & Anr. ...Appellants

Vs.

Crown Realtech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellants: - Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Ms. Chetna Bisht, Advocates.

For Respondents: - Mr. Amit Agarwal, FCS and Mr. Pankaj Agarwal and Mr. Sameer Rastogi, Advocates.

O R D E R

07.03.2019─ This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant(s),

Directors/ Shareholders of 'M/s. Crown Realtech Private Limited'-

('Corporate Debtor') against the order dated 3rd December, 2018 passed

by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal),

Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby and whereunder the application

under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B

Code" for short) filed by Mr. Puneet Kumar Jindal (HUF) through Karta

Mr. Puneet Jindal- ('Financial Creditor') has been admitted; order of

'Moratorium' has been passed and 'Interim Resolution Professional' has

been appointed.

2. On 20th December, 2018, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the Appellants submitted that the parties have settled the claim with

Contd/-...................

-2-

the Respondents- allottees of Real Estate. Such provisional settlement

was reached on 5th December, 2018 i.e. after completion of hearing of

the application but before the impugned order dated 3rd December,

2018 was passed. It is stated that in terms of such provisional

settlement, a sum of Rs. 7 lakh was paid on 14th November, 2018 i.e.

prior to the impugned order. After the impugned order, the formal

settlement has been reached on 5th December, 2018 but much prior to

the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'.

3. Mr. Sameer Rastogi, Advocate appearing on behalf of the

Respondent- Mr. Puneet Kumar Jindal (HUF ('Financial Creditor')

accepts that the parties have settled the claim. He further accepts that

the Respondent- 'Financial Creditor' had received the amount prior to

the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'.

4. Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

'Interim Resolution Professional' submits that the 'Committee of

Creditors' has been constituted on 23rd January, 2019 i.e. prior to the

information given by the Appellants on 20th December, 2018 that the

parties have settled the claim. He further submits that the 'Committee

of Creditors' have now moved before the Adjudicating Authority for

appointment of the new 'Resolution Professional'.

5. In the present case, as we find that the parties have reached

provisional settlement prior to issuance of the impugned order and

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 797 of 2018 -3-

finally settled the matter on 5th December, 2018 i.e. prior to the

constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors', in the light of the decision

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs.

Union of India & Ors.', Writ Petition (Civil) No. 99/2018 (2019 SCC

OnLine SC 73)", we allow the Respondent to withdraw the application

under Section 7. We, accordingly, set aside the impugned order dated

3rd December, 2018 passed in CP (IB) No. 769 of 2018 and disposed of

the application under Section 7 filed by the 'Financial Creditor' as

withdrawn.

6. In effect, order (s), passed by the Adjudicating Authority 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 'Interim Resolution Professional', including the

advertisement published in the newspaper calling for applications all

such orders and actions are set aside. Learned Adjudicating Authority

will now close the proceeding. The '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.

7. The 'Interim Resolution Professional' submits that he is entitled to

receive Rs. 3, 28, 000/- towards the fees and cost of 'Resolution

Process'. Out of the same, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- has been paid. In

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 797 of 2018 -4-

the circumstance, we direct the 'Corporate Debtor' to pay the rest of the

amount of Rs. 1, 78, 000/- to Mr. Amit Agarwal, the 'Interim Resolution

Professional' within three weeks.

The appeal is allowed 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. 797 of 2018

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