TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 714
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... IB-1619/ND/2019, 'against the Respondent, Transrail Lighting Limited' i.e., the Financial Creditor, seeking the following directions: a) To direct the Financial Creditor to withdraw the present petition as the same is infructuous and not maintainable or b) Dismiss the present case as infructuous and not maintainable in view of the settlement and in view of the provisions of section 10A of the IBC, 2016. c) To pass any such order/direction which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in the facts and the circumstances of the case. 2. The applicant submitted that the present matter has been filed under section 7 of IBC, 2016 and is pending for adjudication before this Hon'ble Tribunal. That the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount, nothing shall remain receivable/pay able by the ZEPL from Transmit or payable by Transmit to ZEPL on any account whatsoever pertaining to the aforesaid contracts. (5) After compliance by the parties of the above settlement agreement all the matter shall stand amicably and finally settled and nothing shall remain payable by either party to the other party pertaining to the aforesaid contracts. Transmit reserve rights to continue claim its demand with interest, if ZEPL defaults even a single instalment. (6) That on the aforesaid terms and conditions having been complied by both the parties there shall be nothing left against either the party with respect to the aforesaid contracts. (7) The present Agreement is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s to be paid in four instalments of Rs. 40,82,911 (Rupees Forty Lacs Eighty-Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Eleven only) per month starting from 3rd month from the month of withdrawal of the NCLT case by Transrail (Financial Creditor). The next hearing of the present case at the time of making the upfront payment of Rs. 75,00,000/- was on 30.01.2020 and the Applicant Company was under the belief that the Respondent/Financial Creditor as promised would withdraw the present case on 30.01.2020 since all the condition of settlement agreement was compiled by the Applicant Company. Three months from 30.01.2020 would have been 30.04.2020, therefore dates accordingly were filled in the post-dated cheques. 6. The applicant submits that the Responde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The applicant further submitted that the remaining part of the agreement was to come into effect after the withdrawal of the present case and if any outstanding debt arose thereafter, then a fresh cause of action was made out for which a fresh application is to be filed. 9. The Counsel for the Respondent/Financial Creditor, filed its reply Affidavit on behalf of the Respondent stating that: i. The applicant has previously already admitted the debt due and liable to be paid to the Respondent which is on record of the Tribunal. ii. That the contents of Section 10A of the Code are reproduced below: 10A. Notwithstanding anything contained in sections 7, 9 and 10....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h an executed version of a settlement agreement. However, upon perusal of the settlement agreement, it came to the attention of the Financial Creditor that the Corporate Debtor incorporated additional clauses to their benefit which were not agreed upon by the Financial Creditor in the email communications shared which included the withdrawal of complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by the Financial Creditor upon the Corporate Debtor. v. That after a long negotiation it was agreed between the parties that financial creditor will also withdraw the petition under section 138 subject to Corporate Debtor paying the 2 cheques of INR 2,00,000/- each and in furtherance of the same on 03.03.2020, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the present case in hand the main matter has been filed under section 7 of IBC, 2016 and the default as well as the filing of the application under section 7 has taken place prior to 25th March 2020. The applicant's contention that as both the parties entered into a settlement therefore, there has been novation of the MOU/Agreement dated 28.08.2017 and as a result the previous date of default be rescheduled cannot be accepted since the liability to pay has occurred much before the settlement and before the moratorium under section 10A set in. 13. It is pertinent to mention that as the main matter has been filed under section 7 of IBC, 2016 for initiation of CIRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor, the provision of section 7(5)(a) and....