Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Vivek Bansal vs Burda Druck India Pvt Ltd & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal14 July 2020

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may, under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, set aside an order admitting a corporate insolvency resolution process and permit the corporate debtor to exit that process where the parties have settled their dispute and no Committee of Creditors has been constituted, relying on the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India that a settlement or withdrawal before the constitution of the Committee of Creditors is permissible. Consequential to such exit, the Tribunal may set aside the appointment of the Interim Resolution Professional, the moratorium and all subsequent orders and actions taken pursuant to the admission order, and treat the operational creditor's application as withdrawn, directing the Adjudicating Authority to close the proceedings. Where the Resolution Professional's fee and corporate insolvency resolution process costs are found to be inflated, the Tribunal may fix them at a consolidated sum, having regard to the stage of the process and the period for which the Resolution Professional worked, and apportion that sum between the parties in accordance with the settlement agreement.

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. 552 of 2020

IN THE MATTER OF: Vivek Bansal ...Appellant Versus Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, Advocate

For Respondents : Mr. Susmit Pushkar, Advocate for R-1 Mr. S. Mohammed Raiz, IRP Mr. Subhash Gulati and Mr. Diwakar Maheshwari, Advocates for R-2

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

14.07.2020 I.A. No. 1534 of 2020 has been filed by the Appellant in terms

of Rule 11 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 for

recording the settlement arrived at between the parties. Copy of the settlement

dated 7th July, 2020 entered, inter se, the Appellant and Respondent No. 1 is

annexed thereto. It is submitted that the 'corporate insolvency resolution

process' was commenced at the instance of the Respondent (Operational

Creditor) in terms of the impugned order dated 27th May, 2020 passed by the

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench -V

with consequential orders in the nature of slapping of the moratorium and

appointment of 'Interim Resolution Professional'. However, the parties have

amicably settled the dispute and the 'Corporate Debtor' has agreed to accept the

amount of Rs.4,25,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores and Twenty Five Lakhs Only)

towards full and final settlement of all claims. The 'Settlement Agreement'

incorporates the terms of settlement and the mode of payment at paragraph 3 2

and 4 thereof. The execution and the contents of the 'Settlement Agreement have

been admitted by the parties.

As the parties have reached the settlement and the 'Committee of

Creditors' was not constituted, in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 11 of

the NCLAT Rules, 2016, we set aside the impugned order dated 27th May, 2020

passed in 'C.P. No. IB 2223 (ND)/2019' and allow exit from the 'corporate

insolvency resolution process' which is permissible in terms of the verdict of the

Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India &

Ors.' - (2019) 4 SCC 17). The matter is accordingly disposed of in terms of the

'Settlement Agreement' between the parties.

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 with immediate effect.

So far as the fee and expenses incurred by the Resolution Professional is

concerned, we find that grossly inflated claim has been set up which is

unwarranted. Having regard to the fact that the constitution of the 'Committee

of Creditors' had been put on hold on 17th June, 2020 and the fact that the

'Interim Resolution Professional' worked for not more than one and a half month,

we deem it appropriate to fix the fee and 'corporate insolvency resolution process

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 552 of 2020 3

cost' at a consolidated amount of Rupees Seven Lakhs (inclusive of Rupees Two

Lakhs, which has already been paid by the 'Operational Creditor') to be borne by

both the parties in terms of the settlement agreement in equal proportion.

We make it clear that in the event of default not adhering to the terms of

'Settlement Agreement' as regards the payment of the outstanding instalments,

the 'Operational Creditor' shall be at liberty to seek revival/restoration of the

'corporate insolvency resolution process' proceedings before the Adjudicating

Authority.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Acting Chairperson

[ Justice Anant Bijay Singh ] Member (Judicial)

[ Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra ] Member (Technical)

/ns/gc/

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 552 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