9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hadwale, Advocates for R-2, IRP. Mr. Prakash Shah and Mr. Durgaprasad Poojari, Intervention for Chintamani Enclave Pvt. Ltd. ORDER Heard Ld. Counsels for the parties on I.A. No. 2122 of 2021 an Application under Rule 11 r/w Rule 31 of NCLAT Rules, 2016 to place on record terms of settlement agreement and set aside the impugned order dated 13.05.2021 passed in CP No. 1236/IBC/NCLT/MB/MAH/2020. 2. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Ld. Adjudicating Authority vide impugned order dated 13.05.2021 admitted the Respondent No. 1's Company Petition u/s 7 of the IBC and initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Appellant (Corporate Debtor). The Appeal is filed against the impugned order. Before constituti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies, we have gone through the record. 6. Firstly, we have considered the citations of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant place reliance on para 82 of Swiss Ribbons case (Supra). Para 82 of the Judgment is reproduced as under:- "82. It is clear that once the Code gets triggered by admission of a creditor's petition under Sections 7 to 9, the proceeding that is before the Adjudicating Authority, being a collective proceeding, is a proceeding in rem. Being a proceeding in rem, it is necessary that the body which is to oversee the resolution process must be consulted before any individual corporate debtor is allowed to settle its claim. A question arises as to what is to happen before a committee of creditors is constituted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed in exceptional cases even after issue of invitation of expression of interest under Regulation 36-A. The facts of present case are altogether different. 9. Now we have considered the case of Kamal Singh (Supra). In this case Dinesh Gupta (Operational Creditor) who initiated the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor, filed an Application before the Adjudicating Authority for withdrawal of the Petition and set aside the initiation of CIRP before the Constitution of CoC. The Application was dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority. In this context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the Applicant Dinesh Gupta (Operational Creditor) was justified in filing the Application under Rule 11 of NCLT Rules for withdrawal of Petition on the ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the settlement has taken place at an appellate stage the Applicant who has filed the petition under Section 7 or 9 of the IBC may file the Application (Form - FA) under Section 12-A of the IBC r/w Regulation 30-A of the Regulations for withdrawal of the Petition before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. 13. In this Application and the arguments of Ld. Counsel for the parties have not specified as to why they do not want to file the Application as per prescribed procedure. 14. We are of the view that there is a prescribed procedure for withdrawal of Petition under Section 7 of the IBC. Therefore, there is no justification to invoke inherent power of this Appellate Tribunal and to take on record the terms of the settlement and pass the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
