Surender Vasudeva & Anr vs Crown Realtech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 797 of 2018
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under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 may be set aside, the application permitted to be withdrawn, and the consequential moratorium, freezing orders and actions of the Interim Resolution Professional annulled, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in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
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