2019 (6) TMI 1492 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Withdrawal of admitted CIRP application - Appellant submitted that the Appellant wants to settle dispute and a draft for ₹ 33 lakhs payable to the 'Operational Creditors' is ready - HELD THAT - Mr. Ajay Kumar Jain, 'Interim Resolution Professional' appears in person and submits that the parties have settled the matter and he has received the fees and cost. He further informs that the 'Committee of Creditors' have not been constituted and only one claim received from one of the 'Operational Creditor' - Taking into consideration the development that the parties have settled the matter and that the 'Committee of Creditors' have not been constituted, in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, we allow the settlement. The application preferred by the Respondent under Section 9 of the I B Code is disposed of as withdrawn.

Summary

Issues involved:
Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against a Corporate Debtor. Settlement between parties before constitution of Committee of Creditors. Validity of settlement and its impact on orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority.

Analysis:
The case involved an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by an Operational Creditor against a Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority had admitted the application, leading to an appeal by the Director of the Corporate Debtor. During the proceedings, the Appellant expressed a desire to settle the dispute and presented a draft for payment to the Operational Creditor. It was noted that the Interim Resolution Professional had not yet constituted the Committee of Creditors, prompting further inquiry into the matter.

The Counsel for the Appellant provided a settlement copy confirming the payment of the agreed sum to the Operational Creditor, along with the fees of the Interim Resolution Professional. The Interim Resolution Professional confirmed the settlement and informed the Tribunal that the Committee of Creditors had not been formed, with only one claim received from an Operational Creditor. Considering these developments, the Tribunal, exercising powers under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, allowed the settlement.

As a result of the settlement between the parties and the absence of a constituted Committee of Creditors, the Tribunal set aside all previous orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority, including the appointment of the Interim Resolution Professional and the declaration of moratorium. The application under Section 9 of the I&B Code was disposed of as withdrawn, and the proceedings were directed to be closed. The Corporate Debtor was released from the legal restrictions and permitted to operate independently through its Board of Directors immediately.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed with the mentioned observations and directions, without any costs being awarded. The judgment highlighted the significance of settlements in insolvency proceedings and the authority of the Tribunal to approve such settlements in the absence of a constituted Committee of Creditors.