9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 1398 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking withdrawal of Petition even after admission of the Petition by the Tribunal - HELD THAT - Taking into consideration the averments as contained in the Application as well as the joint memo of compromise filed by the parties, we are inclined to allow this Application. In the circumstances, the CIRP passed by this Tribunal of the Corporate Debtor vide order dated 21.02.2020 stands withdrawn. However the Corporate Debtor is directed to ascertain the expenditure, if any incurred, by the IRP being privy to the order and duly reimburse the same to The IRP with the cost, if any, incurred upon the necessary voucher in support of the expenditure being provided to the Corporate Debtor acting upon as directed by this Tribunal vide order dated 21.02.2020. Application disposed off.
Issues involved:
Withdrawal of petition after admission by the Tribunal under Rule 11 of NCLT, 2016. Analysis: The Tribunal was informed that the Petition was admitted on 21.02.2020, but the order of admission had not been uploaded or copies furnished. Both parties reached a settlement in terms of a joint memo of compromise. The Counsel for the Petitioner cited the Supreme Court's order in the matter of Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & anr. versus Union of India & ors., stating that the Tribunal has inherent powers to allow parties to withdraw a Petition even after admission. Considering the Application and joint memo of compromise, the Tribunal decided to allow the withdrawal under Rule 11 of NCLT, 2016. The Corporate Debtor was directed to reimburse any expenditure incurred by the IRP and return any assets taken into custody. The powers of the Board of Directors, which were suspended, were restored as the Application was allowed. This judgment highlights the Tribunal's discretion to allow withdrawal of a Petition even after admission, as per Rule 11 of NCLT, 2016. The reference to the Supreme Court's order in the Swiss Ribbons case emphasizes the Tribunal's inherent powers in such situations. The importance of parties reaching a settlement through a joint memo of compromise is evident in this case, leading to the withdrawal of the Petition. The directive for the Corporate Debtor to reimburse any expenses incurred by the IRP shows the Tribunal's attention to financial matters even in cases of withdrawal. Additionally, the restoration of the Board of Directors' powers signifies the practical implications of allowing such withdrawals and settlements in insolvency proceedings.
|
