Restoration after voluntary withdrawal requires express liberty; breach of settlement creates a fresh cause, not revival of the petition.

A petition withdrawn pursuant to settlement cannot be restored unless the withdrawal order expressly reserves liberty to revive it before the same forum. An order granting leave only to pursue appropriate proceedings before the competent authority does not amount to permission to restore the withdrawn insolvency petition, and a relief not expressly granted is treated as refused. The insolvency framework and tribunal rules do not provide for restoration of a petition finally disposed of as withdrawn; restoration provisions apply to dismissal for default or ex parte disposal. Breach of settlement may create a fresh cause of action, but it does not revive the terminated proceeding.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the authority mentioned in the earlier withdrawal order included the NCLT so as to permit restoration before it; (ii) Whether the withdrawn insolvency petition could be restored in the absence of an express liberty to revive it.

Issue (i): Whether the authority mentioned in the earlier withdrawal order included the NCLT so as to permit restoration before it.

Analysis: The earlier order granted liberty only to initiate appropriate proceedings before the competent authority. The application for withdrawal had sought an alternative prayer for either NCLT or any other legal remedy, but the order consciously granted only the alternative route and did not expressly permit revival before the NCLT. Where a relief is claimed but not expressly granted, it is treated as refused.

Conclusion: The competent authority did not include the NCLT, and no liberty was granted to approach it for restoration.

Issue (ii): Whether the withdrawn insolvency petition could be restored in the absence of an express liberty to revive it.

Analysis: The scheme of withdrawal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and the connected rules permits withdrawal of an admitted or pending application, but there is no provision enabling restoration of a petition that has been finally disposed of as withdrawn. The restoration provisions in the tribunal rules apply to dismissal for default or ex parte disposal, not to a voluntary withdrawal. Breach of settlement may give rise to a fresh cause of action, but it does not revive the terminated proceeding. The settlement here was voluntary and untainted by fraud, coercion, or misrepresentation.

Conclusion: The withdrawn petition was not liable to be restored.

Final Conclusion: The application for restoration failed in limine because the earlier withdrawal order did not reserve any right to revive the matter before the NCLT, and the governing insolvency framework does not authorise restoration of a petition disposed of as withdrawn.

Ratio Decidendi: A petition finally withdrawn pursuant to settlement cannot be restored unless the withdrawal order expressly reserves such liberty, and a breach of settlement creates only a fresh cause of action, not a right to revive the terminated proceeding.

---