9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sal of Section 7 application filed by the Appellants on the grounds that neither debt nor default is reasonably proved - insufficient proof of debt and default - amicable settlement of disputes - HELD THAT:- The matter went through several rounds of hearing and after considering the arguments advanced by the Learned Counsels for all the parties, the matter was reserved for judgement on 19.12.2024. After the matter got reserved, the parties approached each other for amicable settlement to resolve the disputes. It has now been submitted that a Settlement Agreement dated 15.01.2025 has been entered upon. In view of the mutual settlement having been entered into between the parties, no opinion expressed on the rights and contentions of either ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2020 in CP(IB) No. 1680 of 2018 whereby application for revival of main Company Petition No. 1680 of 2018 under Section 7 of the IBC by the Appellant has been dismissed on the ground that a Memorandum of Settlement had been entered between the parties leading to settlement between the parties. Company Appeal No. 299 of 2023 arises out of impugned order dated 13.01.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench) whereby the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed Misc Application No. 382/KB/2020 wherein a prayer had been made for revival of the main Company Petition No. 34/KB/2019 in view of the settlement between the parties and reference of the matter for arbitration proceedings and consequential pass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned between them on 31.07.2016. In terms of the MoU, the entire shareholding of the Appellant No.1 & 2 was to be transferred to Khetan Group for a consideration of about Rs 45 Cr. 4. Elaborating further it was submitted that pending the full and complete transfer of their shareholding, Appellant No.1 and Appellant No.2 infused a sum of money of Rs 7,26,00,788/- either by themselves or through Appellant No.3-M/s Indo Lahari Bio Power Pvt. Ltd. ("Lahari" in short). These sums were infused towards servicing operational expenditures and financial indebtedness of the Corporate Debtor. It was submitted that these sums of money were infused pending transfer of management and control of the Corporate Debtor upon the express understanding that such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this constituted unequivocal and unconditional admission that the sums disbursed by the Appellants had commercial effect of borrowing. It is further submitted that the Appellants had sent Demand Notices on 12.09.2018 demanding repayment of the entire sum within 10 days from the date of receipt of the notice failing which it would constitute a default on the part of the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor failed to repay the said amount which amounted to be a clear default on the part of the Corporate Debtor. Since the existence of financial debt and default are matters of record, this was a fit case for admission of the Section 7 application. 6. Shri Kumarjit Banerjee, Ld. Counsel for the Appellants making submissions in respect of Comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ive Company Petition No. 1680 of 2020 upon the failure of the settlement which was however erroneously dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority. Another application had also been filed by the Appellants seeking revival of the main Company Petition No. 34/KB/2019 upon the failure of the settlement which was also wrongly dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority. It was contended that the issue of settlement of the dispute with regard to the debt as claimed by the Respondent by adverting reference to the fact that the debt was under arbitration is misconceived as the arbitral award was under challenge under Section 37 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act before the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh. It was also submitted that reference to arbitrat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llants No.1 & 2. 9. It was also asserted that after institution of the Section 7 application by the Appellants, both parties had mutually and amicably agreed to refer their dispute to arbitration and accordingly entered into an Arbitration Agreement on 06.09.2019. The Appellants had never denied the existence of MoS and Agreement for Appointment of Arbitrator. The Agreement of Arbitration was valid and binding and on reference of the dispute to arbitration, the Section 7 application was rendered infructuous and non-maintainable. It was also added that the Appellants had participated in the arbitral proceedings. The Arbitral Tribunal had published its award on 15.11.2019 which award has been put into execution before the Commercial Court at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
