T. Dhanasekar vs Vinayak Cotton Agencies & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 582 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the parties have settled the operational creditor's debt in full before the Committee of Creditors is constituted, the Appellate Tribunal may, in the exercise of its inherent powers under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, allow the settlement, set aside the admission order and all consequential orders including the appointment of the Interim Resolution Professional and the declaration of moratorium, and dispose of the Section 9 application as withdrawn, the Adjudicating Authority being directed to close the proceedings.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
T. Dhanasekar ...Appellant
Versus
M/s. Vinayak Cotton Agencies & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. S.S. Madhavan and Mr. Ananda Selvam, Advocates
For Respondents: Mr. C. Rubavathi, Advocate for R-1 Mr. P.K. Kar and Mr. A.P. Bharat Kumar, Advocates
Mr. V. Venkata Sivakumar, IRP
ORDER
03.07.2019 'M/s. Vinayak Cotton Agencies' (Operational Creditor) filed an
application u/s 9 of the 'Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short, 'the
I&B Code') against 'M/s. Mariyammal Spinners Pvt. Limited' (Corporate Debtor),
which having admitted on 20th May, 2019 by the Adjudicating Authority
(National Company Law Tribunal), Division Bench, Chennai, the present appeal
has been preferred by Mr. T. Dhanasekar, Managing Director of the 'Corporate
Debtor'.
2. On 3rd June, 2019, the learned counsel for the Appellant and the 1st
Respondent (Operational Creditor) appeared and intimated that the Appellant
reached the settlement with the 'Operational Creditor' and the 'Committee of 2
Creditors' has not yet been constituted. In that background, we allow them to
settle the dues before the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'.
3. Today, it is informed that the in terms of the 'Settlement' the total dues of
Rs. 2.58 Crores has been paid by the Appellant in favour of the Respondent -
'M/s. Vinayak Cotton Agencies'. Learned counsel for the Respondent also
agrees. It is also accepted by 'Mr. V. Venkata Sivakumar, Interim Resolution
Professional appeared and accepted that 'Committee of Creditors' has not yet
been constituted though he has collated some claims. It is submitted that the
fee and resolution cost payable will be paid by the Appellant. Learned counsel
for the Appellant submits that he will pay the fee and the resolution cost to Mr.
V. Venkata Sivakumar, IRP within three week.
4. In the facts and circumstances exercising inherent powers under Rule 11
of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, we allow the
settlement and set aside the impugned order dated 20th May, 2019. We allow
the 1st Respondent to withdraw the application u/s 9 filed by the 1st Respondent
which is dismissed as withdrawn. The proceedings before the Adjudicating
Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Division Bench, Chennai is closed.
5. The Appellant is directed to pay the total fee and the resolution cost to the
'Interim Resolution Professional' within 3 weeks.
6. In effect, order (s) passed by Ld. Adjudicating Authority appointing 'Interim
Resolution Professional', declaring moratorium and all other order (s) passed by
Adjudicating Authority pursuant to impugned order and action taken by the
'Resolution Professional' are set aside. The application preferred by the
Respondent under Section 9 of the I&B Code is disposed of as withdrawn. The
Adjudicating Authority will now close the proceeding. The Respondent Company
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 582 of 2019 3
is released from all the rigour of law and is allowed to function independently
through its Board of Directors from immediate effect.
The appeal is allowed with aforesaid observations and directions. No
costs.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)
[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical) /ns/gc
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 582 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