National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Disposes Appeal in Insolvency Matter — Parties Allowed to Pursue Settlement. The court recognized the amicable settlement between the parties and allowed for the withdrawal of proceedings under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed against an order dated 05.08.2026 by the National Company Law Tribunal, which initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the appellant. The appellant contended that an amicable settlement had been reached between the parties, evidenced by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 29.07.2026, which stipulated that the Respondent No. 1 would withdraw the proceedings. However, due to procedural defects, this MoU could not be presented to the Adjudicating Authority in time. The appellant argued that since the dispute was settled, there was no basis for the impugned order. The parties jointly acknowledged the settlement and the subsequent application by Respondent No. 1 to withdraw the proceedings, which was eventually presented to the Adjudicating Authority on 19.08.2026. The court considered the facts and allowed the parties to pursue their grievance before the Adjudicating Authority, providing liberty to the Respondent No. 1 to move for withdrawal of the CIRP proceedings under Section 12A of the Code. The interim order issued by the Tribunal remained in effect until the final disposal of the application IA No. 3840/2026, scheduled for 09.09.2026. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Amicable Settlement - Withdrawal of Proceedings - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 - The parties had settled their dispute amicably before the impugned order was passed, and the Respondent No. 1 was to withdraw the proceedings. The court held that the parties may pursue their grievance before the Adjudicating Authority and allowed for the withdrawal of proceedings under Section 12A if the opportunity arises (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the impugned order should be set aside due to an amicable settlement between the parties.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal was disposed of, allowing the parties to pursue their grievance before the Adjudicating Authority and permitting the Respondent No. 1 to move for withdrawal of the CIRP proceedings under Section 12A if the opportunity arises.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • amicable settlement
  • withdrawal of proceedings
  • CIRP Regulations
  • inherent powers of NCLT
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 41

CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1465 of 2026

2026-09-08

Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Naresh Salecha

Mrs. Monica Goel, Mr. Samit Khosla

Prajit Prasannan

Bhagwati Trading Co.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the impugned order and allow withdrawal of proceedings.

Filing Reason

Dispute was settled amicably before the impugned order was passed.

Previous Decisions

The National Company Law Tribunal initiated CIRP against the appellant.

Issues

Whether the impugned order should be set aside due to an amicable settlement between the parties.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that an amicable settlement was reached and the Respondent No. 1 was to withdraw the proceedings. The Respondent No. 1 acknowledged the settlement and sought to withdraw the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of amicable settlements in insolvency proceedings and allowed for the withdrawal of proceedings under the relevant provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Judgment Excerpts

The parties had arrived at an amicable settlement during the pendency of the proceedings. The court held that the parties may pursue their grievance before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the order dated 05.08.2026, which initiated CIRP against the appellant. An application for withdrawal was later presented to the Adjudicating Authority on 19.08.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 9, Section 12A
  • CIRP Regulations, 2016: Regulation 30A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Criminal Appeals Against Conviction for Murder Due to Credible Witness Testimony. Conviction upheld as the testimony of a single reliable witness was sufficient to establish guilt under Section 302 IPC.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Enhances Compensation for POCSO Victim Under NALSA Scheme — Inadequate Compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 Enhanced to Rs. 10,50,000. The court held that the NALSA Scheme mandates minimum compensation of Rs. 7,00,000 for sexual ass...