Tribunal sets aside order, accepts settlement, releases Corporate Debtor from CIRP, and concludes appeal.

The Tribunal set aside the order admitting the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, accepted the settlement between the parties, and quantified the costs. The Corporate Debtor was released from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) following the settlement. The Tribunal directed the communication of its decision to the Adjudicating Authority for case closure, concluding the appeal proceedings.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Admission of application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 in ex-parte, settlement agreement between parties, constitution of Committee of Creditors, fairness of the procedure in constituting the Committee of Creditors, acceptance of settlement, quantification of costs, release of Corporate Debtor from CIRP.

Admission of Application under Section 9:
The Adjudicating Authority admitted the Operational Creditor's application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) in an ex-parte manner. The Corporate Debtor learned about the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) only after receiving an email from the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Corporate Debtor subsequently settled the claim with the Operational Creditor and executed a Settlement Agreement for withdrawal of the application under Section 9. The IRP was informed to initiate the process for withdrawal, but no action was taken.

Settlement Agreement:
The Operational Creditor confirmed that the claim had been settled by the Corporate Debtor as per the Settlement Agreement, which involved a payment of a specific amount. The Stamp Paper issued on the date of the Settlement Agreement was presented as evidence. The IRP, representing the Committee of Creditors, acknowledged the settlement and claimed fees and costs incurred during the resolution process.

Constitution of Committee of Creditors:
The Committee of Creditors was constituted hastily by the IRP, despite there being only one claim received. The IRP justified this by stating that the quick constitution was due to the single claim received. However, the timing of the constitution raised concerns about the fairness of the process, as certain procedures under the I&B Code were seemingly rushed.

Acceptance of Settlement and Quantification of Costs:
Considering the settlement between the parties and the satisfaction of the Operational Creditor's claim, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to accept the settlement. The total costs, including the IRP's fee and CIRP costs, were quantified. The parties agreed to the payment of these costs, with the Operational Creditor undertaking to provide the required amount to the IRP within a specified timeframe. Consequently, the Corporate Debtor was released from the CIRP.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order of admission under Section 9 of the I&B Code, accepted the settlement, and disposed of the appeal accordingly. The order was to be communicated to the Adjudicating Authority for case closure, marking the resolution of the issues raised in the appeal.

---