Viveck Goel vs Pooja Finelease Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.152 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority's order dismissing a Section 7 application as withdrawn under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, following settlement of the financial creditor's claim, is a subsisting order that the Tribunal may act upon; where the Adjudicating Authority has so dismissed the application, the order commencing the corporate insolvency resolution process under which it was made may be set aside in the appeal, and the corporate debtor released from the process and returned to the management of its Board of Directors. Where the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the application as withdrawn and the parties have an opportunity to move the Tribunal to recall the order if the settlement cheques are dishonoured or the CIRP costs and fees are not paid, the Tribunal may dispose of the appeal on that basis, directing that the Interim Resolution Professional account for and make over the assets and records and that the CIRP costs and fees be settled before the Adjudicating Authority.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.152 of 2020 IN THE MATTER OF: Vivek Goel ...Appellant Versus Pooja Finelease Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
For Appellant: Shri M.P. Sahay and Ms. Eccha Shukla, Advocates For Respondents: Shri Rajendra Beniwal, Shri Kumar Sumit and Shri Chirag Gupta, Advocates
ORDER
11.02.2020 Heard Advocate - Shri M.P. Sahay for the Appellant -
Corporate Debtor. Heard Advocate - Shri Rajendra Beniwal for Respondent
No.1 - Financial Creditor. The Advocate for Interim Resolution Professional
was present on last date but is not present today. Counsel for Appellant
submits at Bar true copy of Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority
(National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Court- VI) on 5th February, 2020
in IB-2340/ND/2019 which reads as under:-
"ORDER Heard the submissions made by the counsel for the financial-creditor. Counsel for the corporate-debtor is present. Authorized Representative is also present and submitted that they have received 12 cheques towards full and final settlement of their claim. The application filed under Rule 11 of NCLT rules, 2016 is taken on record and the application is allowed as a consequence the petition filed under Section 7 stands dismissed as withdrawn, in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016."
The True copy is marked 'X' for identification.
2. Counsel for Appellant states that in view of the Order passed by the
Adjudicating Authority dismissing the Application under Section 7 as
withdrawn, he may be permitted to withdraw this Appeal. The learned -2-
Counsel for Respondent agrees that such Order has been passed by the
Adjudicating Authority and concedes that the Impugned Order may be set
aside.
3. Considering Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 5th
February, 2020, the Impugned Order is set aside.
4. The IRP/RP will submit particulars regarding CIRP costs and fees to the
Adjudicating Authority and the Adjudicating Authority will consider the same
and direct the Corporate Debtor to pay the same in time to be specified. The
IRP (Interim Resolution Professional) will hand over the assets and records of
the Corporate Debtor to the Board of Directors of the Corporate Debtor. The
Corporate Debtor is released from all the rigours of the Corporate Insolvency
Resolution Process and is allowed to function independently through Board
of Directors.
5. If the cheques issued are dishonoured or CIRP costs, or fees of IRP/RP
are not paid, parties are at liberty to move this Tribunal to recall present
Order.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
[Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member (Judicial)
(Justice A.B. Singh) Member (Judicial)
[Kanthi Narahari] Member (Technical) rs/md Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.152 of 2020
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