Binding consent terms and reserved liberty to revive insolvency proceedings justified restoration after continued settlement default.

Consent terms recorded before the NCLAT are binding and must be strictly performed, and where the disposal order expressly reserves liberty to revive proceedings on default, that liberty can be invoked on breach. The record showed continuing non-compliance with the settlement repayment schedule, and later attempts to sell property did not cure the admitted defaults. On that basis, the appeal was restored, the earlier disposal order was recalled, and the insolvency proceedings were revived.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to restoration of the appeal and revival of the insolvency proceedings on account of breach of the court-recorded consent terms.

Analysis: The appeal had been disposed of on the basis of consent terms and the earlier CIRP admission order had been set aside, with express liberty reserved to revive the proceedings on default. The record showed substantial and continuing non-compliance with the repayment schedule under the settlement, and the alleged later efforts to sell property did not erase the admitted defaults. The Tribunal held that obligations undertaken before a judicial forum had to be strictly complied with and that the reserved liberty to revive could be invoked upon breach.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to restoration of the appeal and revival of the insolvency proceedings. The order disposing of the appeal was recalled and the restoration application was allowed.

---