# In the matter of Arjun Puri Vs. Kunal Prasad & Ors. CA(AT)(Insolvency) 52-2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2019-01-31. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLAT-00820. The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 31 Jan 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLAT-00820
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/arjun-puri-vs-kunal-prasad-ors-ca-057f58a1

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) admitting an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant, a shareholder and corporate debtor, challenged the order, arguing that the Adjudicating Authority failed to consider the contract between the parties and the absence of default in payment of debt. The parties had already settled the claim, and the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) confirmed that the resolution cost and fee had been paid.

## Facts

Arjun Puri, the appellant and shareholder (Corporate Debtor), challenged an order dated January 10, 2019, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi. The order admitted an application filed by Kunal Prasad, the respondent, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant argued that the Adjudicating Authority failed to consider the contract between the parties and the absence of default in payment of debt. The parties had already settled the claim. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) confirmed that the resolution cost and fee had been paid. An advertisement was issued asking for claims, but the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had not been constituted. The respondent wanted to withdraw

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the application under Section 7 of the …

**Ratio:** The ratio is based on the principle that parties can settle matters before the

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the parties had settled the matter before the constitution of the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the settlement between the parties, reached before

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning were applied to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Arjun…
- **Respondents:** Kunal P…
- **Advocates:** K. Venu…; Pawan S…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2019-01-10 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) passed an order admitting an…
- **2019-01-31 — Appeal F…**: The appellant, Arjun Puri, challenged the order dated January 10, 2019, passed by the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/arjun-puri-vs-kunal-prasad-ors-ca-057f58a1