2020 (2) TMI 1335 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Permission for withdrawal of appeal - Prohibition on constitution of CoC - HELD THAT - The Interim Resolution Professional are directed to go ahead with the constitution of the Committee of Creditors . Interim order prohibiting constitution of Committee of Creditors is accordingly modified. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn - It is clarified that this is a simple case of withdrawal of the Appeal and does not reflect on the merits of the case of either of the parties before the Adjudicating Authority.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Settlement of claim by the appellant with the operational creditor
2. Dispute regarding settlement of claim by the operational creditor
3. Filing of claims by other parties before the Interim Resolution Professional
4. Incorrect recording of claims received by the Interim Resolution Professional
5. Constitution of the Committee of Creditors
6. Appeal withdrawal by the Appellant

Analysis:

1. The appellant has claimed to settle the claim of the sole operational creditor of the first respondent, Sri Chaitanya Chloride. However, this settlement is disputed by the learned counsel for the operational creditor. This issue revolves around the settlement of claims between the parties involved in the insolvency resolution process.

2. Other parties, including Mr. Avnish Kumar and Mr. M.L. Jain of M/s. Bahubali Enterprises, have also approached the Adjudicating Authority for the initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process. They have been directed to file claims before the Interim Resolution Professional. The Interim Resolution Professional clarifies the number of claims received, correcting a previous order's recording error. The Committee of Creditors has not been constituted, leading to a halt in the resolution process.

3. In light of the circumstances, the Tribunal directs the Interim Resolution Professional to proceed with the constitution of the Committee of Creditors. An interim order prohibiting the constitution of the Committee of Creditors is modified accordingly. This issue pertains to the procedural steps required in the insolvency resolution process.

4. The Appellant expresses the desire to withdraw the appeal at this stage. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, with a clarification that the withdrawal does not reflect on the merits of the case before the Adjudicating Authority. This issue concerns the voluntary withdrawal of the appeal by the Appellant, signaling the conclusion of the appellate proceedings.

This judgment addresses various aspects of the insolvency resolution process, including claim settlements, filing procedures, errors in recording claims, and the constitution of the Committee of Creditors. The decision to allow the withdrawal of the appeal signifies the resolution of the matter at the appellate stage without impacting the underlying merits of the case before the Adjudicating Authority.