Challenging Admission Orders in Insolvency Cases: Key Points and Procedures

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of setting aside an admission order under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 following a settlement between the Creditor and the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of a settlement before admission does not invalidate the admission order. It was noted that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had not been constituted, allowing the Corporate Debtor to seek exit from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) before CoC formation. The Tribunal directed the Appellant to approach the Adjudicating Authority for seeking exit by submitting the settlement terms and ordered a temporary halt on CoC formation to facilitate this process.

---

---

Issues: Setting aside of order of admission under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 due to settlement between Creditor and Corporate Debtor; Non-constitution of Committee of Creditors (CoC) and its implications on Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

In the judgment delivered by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, the main issue revolved around the setting aside of the order of admission under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 due to a settlement reached between the Creditor and the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant argued that the settlement occurred after the admission order, which should not invalidate the admission. The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of a settlement before the admission does not inherently make the admission order flawed. Furthermore, it was highlighted that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had not been constituted yet, as confirmed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in "Swiss Ribbons and Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.", the Tribunal noted that the Corporate Debtor could seek exit from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) before the CoC formation. However, the decision to allow such exit needed to consider the interests of all stakeholders and be determined by the Adjudicating Authority based on the specific case facts.

Given the Appellant's difficulty in accessing the Adjudicating Authority due to holidays, the Tribunal directed the Appellant to approach the Adjudicating Authority for seeking exit by submitting the settlement terms. The Tribunal ordered that the CoC should not be constituted for a week to facilitate this process. The Respondent was granted the liberty to oppose the motion if legally permissible. The Tribunal stressed the importance of communicating a copy of the order promptly to the Adjudicating Authority to ensure compliance and further actions in the matter.

---