In a decision that may aid
corporate debtors under insolvency proceedings to reach mutual settlements, the
Supreme Court used its extraordinary powers in a case that came before it to
permit two companies to withdraw insolvency proceedings and settle their loan
dispute amongst themselves. The Court used its extraordinary constitutional
powers u/Art. 142 to grant the relief to the appellant companies since the
matter was already under the consideration of NCLT (National Company Law
Tribunal), and on appeal the NCLAT (National Company Law Appellate Tribunal) had
passed a decision on 13th July 2017 to the effect that the
proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code of 2016 cannot be
withdrawn even if the parties decide to settle the dispute. The Court used the
provision to do “complete justice” under Art. 142 to allow the parties to
settle the matter in terms of the agreement arrived at between the parties,
despite the matter being under consideration of the NCLT.
The Prologue
The matter came before the NCLT by way of an
application filed by the financial creditor Nisus Finance & Investment
Manager LLP (Respondent in the Appeals) against the debtor Lokhandwala Kataria
Construction Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant before the NCLAT and the Supreme Court) under
the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code after the first cheque issued for redemption
of the part of the debenture was dishonored. The NCLT admitted the application
and ruled to initiate corporate insolvency proceedings if the debtor company
failed to fulfill its obligations. But both the parties submitted later before
the NCLAT that they had arrived at a settlement and part of the amount had
already been paid. The NCLAT however observed that “even the Financial Creditor cannot be allowed to withdraw the
application once admitted, and matter cannot be closed till claim of all the
creditors are satisfied by the corporate debtor”. The NCLT laid emphasis of
consideration on the claims of other creditors, even if a settlement has been
arrived at between the parties of the present dispute, and refused to stall the
insolvency application in view of the settlement between the parties, and dismissed
the Appeal. The Debtor thereafter approached the Supreme Court under second
Appeal to consider the matter, which is where the said decision has been passed
by the Court.
The Decision and its possible Effects
The Supreme Court, while allowing
the parties settle, did not question the law on which the NCLAT decided against
the settlement, and clarified that prima facie the position taken by the Tribunal
that withdrawal cannot be allowed is correct. However, the Court used its
extraordinary powers to allow the parties to settle the dispute in terms of the
agreement between them.
While the decision does not in
any way alter the position of the law on insolvency or the provisions under the
IBC 2016, it certainly comes as an auxiliary relief to insolvent companies. The
Court may use its powers to do justice to the parties even when the stringent
interpretations of the provisions of law are unfavorable to them. It gives the
defaulters a second chance to amicably settle their financial disputes, and
promotes a win-win scenario where the creditor receives the payment; while the
debtor does not necessarily have to face insolvency proceedings despite the
applicant (creditor) himself being willing to withdraw the application before
NCLT.
No comments:
Post a Comment