TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 70
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved and dissatisfied by the Impugned Order dated 07.04.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench- VI) in IB- 1023/(ND)/2020, whereby an application was filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'IBC') with a prayer to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short 'CIRP'), the prayer was allowed and the CIRP was initiated and Mr. Mansij Arya was appointed as Interim Resolution Professional (in short 'IRP'). 2. The facts giving rise to this Appeal are as follows: (i) Both the parties entered into Consultancy Agreement dated 20.10.2018 according to which the Respondent had to provide consultancy services to the Appellant. (ii) The Respondent had r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o pay Rs. 2,75,00,000/- + GST to save the business. The Company at the relevant time was executing contract worth Rs. 2250/- Crores. (xi) The Application was filed under Section 12A of the IBC r/w Regulation 30A of the CIRP and Rule 11 of NCLT Rules dated 26.04.2021 was filed. (xii) The Respondent filed an Application for withdrawal of the CIRP under Regulation 30A of IBBI (Insolvency Regulation Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. (xiii) Thereafter the aforesaid agreement was filed before the Adjudicating Authority in IB-1023/ND/2020 on 05.05.2021, the matter was taken up but due to insistence of the alleged creditor, the Appellant was forced to make a statement that it shall make the balance payment within 5 days. (xi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the fundamental principle of law and needs no further elaboration. Therefore, it is has been said that a judgment, decree order obtained by fraud has to be treated as a nullity, whether by the court of first instance or by the final court. And it has to be treated as non est by every Court, superior or inferior. 40. Hence, the argument or Mr. Venugopal cannot be upheld. Even if he is right in submitting that after dismissal of SLPs, the respondent herein could not have approached the High Court for recalling its earlier order passed in April 2000 and the High Court could not have entertained such applications, nor the recalling could have been done, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the finding by the High Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch were neither raised nor uploaded on the website, therefore, the entire case of the Respondent is based on fraud and on fictitious documents and the Impugned Orders is fit to be set aside with the imposition of maximum penalty of Rs. 1 Crore. 7. Counsel for the Respondent during course of arguments and in their Written Affidavit submitted that vide Impugned Order dated 07.04.2021 by which CIRP of the Corporate Debtor was initiated is not in operation today and the said order was set aside. Pursuant to which, an application was filed under Section 12A of the IBC, 2016 r/w Regulation 30A of CIRP Regulation 2016 and Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules 2016. As the Appeal is barred of principles of res judicata, the Appeal was preferred against the or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 07.04.2021 is concerned, the same is not in operation today as the same was effectively set aside by the withdrawal of the order dated 12.05.2021, which relieved the Corporate Debtor from the clutches of the CIRP. 11. Counsel for the Respondent further submitted that so far as the Impugned Order dated 12.05.2021 is concerned, the same was passed on the Settlement Agreement signed mutually between the parties, on the basis of which the Operational Creditor had submitted the Form FA to the IRP, which is reproduced as hereunder :- 12. Counsel for the Respondent further submitted that the Appellant had made inappropriate averments as regards GST is concerned. It is submitted that whether the GST rules were complied or not by the Operat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ks Order Value) to the Consultant on Bill to Bill basis (Pro Rata basis as and when the bills are cleared& Payments received by JSPPPL). JSPPPL shall also deduct any other advances paid as per the terms of the clause 5 of this agreement from any fee payable to the Consultant pursuant to this agreement." 15. Counsel for the Respondent further submitted that the aforesaid clause provides for milestones on which the Corporate Debtor was to make payment to the Operational Creditor. The transaction between the parties was particularly with respect to tender ref: 136/PR/JBVNL/18-19. 16. Counsel for the Appellant concluded his arguments and submitted that there is no merit in the Appeal and the Appeal is fit to be dismissed. 17. After hearing....