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

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 6
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 would withdraw the proceedings. However, due to procedural defects, the MoU could not be presented to the Adjudicating Authority in time. The appellant argued that since there was no dispute remaining, the Adjudicating Authority should not have passed the impugned order. The parties jointly acknowledged the settlement and requested the court to allow them to approach the Adjudicating Authority for withdrawal of the proceedings under Section 12A of the Code. The court noted that the application for withdrawal was eventually presented and that the Adjudicating Authority had taken cognizance of it. The court disposed of the appeal, allowing the parties to pursue their grievance before the Adjudicating Authority and granting liberty to the respondent to file an application for withdrawal of the CIRP proceedings. The interim order issued by the court was to remain in effect until the final disposal of the application before the Adjudicating Authority.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Amicable Settlement - Effect of Settlement on Proceedings - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 - The parties had reached an amicable settlement before the impugned order was passed, which should have been considered by the Adjudicating Authority. The court held that the parties may pursue their grievance before the Adjudicating Authority in light of the settlement (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the impugned order should be set aside due to the 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 granting liberty to the respondent to file an application for withdrawal of the CIRP proceedings.

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) 42

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. Through Its Proprietor & Anr.

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

Claim of amicable settlement between the parties.

Previous Decisions

The National Company Law Tribunal initiated CIRP against the appellant.

Issues

Effect of amicable settlement on ongoing insolvency proceedings Authority of the Adjudicating Authority to pass orders in light of settlement

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the dispute was settled and no proceedings should have been initiated. Respondent acknowledged the settlement and sought to withdraw the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of considering amicable settlements in insolvency proceedings and allowed the parties to withdraw the proceedings based on their settlement.

Judgment Excerpts

The parties had arrived at an amicable settlement during the pendency of the proceedings. We dispose of this appeal in terms that the parties may pursue their grievance before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority in IA No. 3840/2026.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the order of the National Company Law Tribunal dated 05.08.2026, which initiated CIRP against the appellant. The parties submitted a settlement deed, which was not presented in time, leading to the appeal.

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
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Transfer of Cheque Dishonour Case from Aurangabad to Latur Under Section 407 CrPC — Father-Son Dispute Over Compromise Terms. Convenience of Parties and Ends of Justice Justify Transfer Where All Witnesses and Parties Excep...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Estate Administration Suit — Appellant Failed to Establish Entitlement to Relief Under Consent Decree of 1958. The court held that the notice of motion seeking compliance with consent terms was not maintainable...