Tapan Basu Roy vs Blue Star Ltd. & Anr

Tapan Basu Roy .... Appellant

Vs

Blue Star Ltd. & Anr. .... Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Ankit Jain, Advocate.

For Respondents: Mr. Yashvardhan, Advocate for 1st Respondent.

Mr. Apoorv Shukla, Advocate for 2nd Respondent.

ORDER

04.07.2019 Blue Star Limited ('Operational Creditor') filed an

application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

(I&B Code) against M/s Westwind Engineers Private Limited ('Corporate

Debtor'), which having admitted on 4th December, 2018, the present Appeal

has been preferred by Mr. Tapan Basu Roy, Director, M/s Westwind

Engineers Private Limited ('Corporate Debtor').

2. Earlier, when the matter was taken up on 2nd July, 2019, learned

counsel for the parties informed that matter is settled. The submissions

made by the parties were recorded as follows: -

"It is informed that the parties have reached settlement on 26th June, 2019 before the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'. A copy of the 'Terms of

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 127 of 2019 Page 1 of 3 Settlement Agreement' has been produced. Learned counsel for the 1st Respondent also accepts that the settlement has been reached before the constitution of the 'Committee of Creditors'. However, we find that 2nd Respondent (Resolution Professional) is not present. In the circumstances, we adjourn the matter for appearance of the 'Resolution Professional'. The parties will inform the 'Resolution Professional' for his appearance."

3. Mr. Apoorv Shukla, learned Counsel appears on behalf of the

'Resolution Professional' and submits that the 'Committee of Creditors' have

not yet been constituted. He submits that he has already received two

claims. Further, according to him, he incurred cost of about Rs.1,40,000/-

and is entitled for a fee for about seven months, which comes to around

Rs.2,10,000/-, i.e., total Rs.3,50,000/-.

4. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that

'Corporate Debtor' is ready to pay the cost and fee of the 'Resolution

Professional', if the 'Corporate Debtor' is allowed to exit from the 'Resolution

Process'.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, in

exercise of powers conferred under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, we

accept the terms of settlement and set-aside the impugned order dated 4th

December, 2018.

6. So far as the fee and cost of the 'Resolution Professional' is concerned,

the 'Corporate Debtor' will pay a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs in favour of 'Resolution

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 127 of 2019 Page 2 of 3 Professional' within three weeks, failing which, it will be open to the

'Resolution Professional' to bring the same to the notice of this Appellate

Tribunal.

7. 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 is released from all the rigour of law and is allowed to function

independently through its Board of Directors from immediate effect.

8. 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)

Ash/GC

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 127 of 2019 Page 3 of 3