# In the matter of Konda Raghu Rami Reddy Vs. Sri Chaitanya Chlorides & Anr. CA(AT)(Ins) No. 41 of 2020

> NCLAT judgment dated 2020-02-13. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLAT-00408. The case involves an appeal related to an insolvency matter. The appellant claimed to have…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 13 Feb 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLAT-00408
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/konda-raghu-rami-reddy-vs-sri-chaitanya-chlorides-anr-ca-9ab8e801

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal related to an insolvency matter. The appellant claimed to have settled with the sole operational creditor of the first respondent, Sri Chaitanya Chloride, but this settlement was disputed. The Adjudicating Authority directed Bahubali Enterprises to file claims before the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The IRP stated that the number of claims received from operational creditors was incorrectly recorded in a previous order. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) had not yet been constituted, and the resolution process had stalled.

## Facts

Konda Raghu Rami Reddy filed an appeal related to an insolvency matter. The appellant claimed to have settled with Sri Chaitanya Chloride, the sole operational creditor of the first respondent, but this settlement was disputed by the respondent. Bahubali Enterprises approached the Adjudicating Authority for initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process and were directed to file claims before the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The IRP reported that a previous order incorrectly stated the number of claims received from operational creditors. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) had not yet been constituted, and the resolution process had stalled. The appellant then sought to withdraw the appeal.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the settlement between the appellant and the …

**Ratio:** Settlements between parties are generally enforceable unless there is a dispute regarding

…

**Reasoning:** The court noted that the settlement was disputed by the learned counsel for the 1st

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation hinges on the principles of contract law, where a valid

…

**Application:** Since the settlement was disputed, the court did not enforce it directly but

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Bansi Lal…; V. P. S…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Konda Raghu Rami…
- **Respondents:** M/s. Sri Chaitanya…
- **Advocates:** Kartik…; Shivali D…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2020-02-13 — Order Da…**: Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant has settled the claim of the…

---

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/konda-raghu-rami-reddy-vs-sri-chaitanya-chlorides-anr-ca-9ab8e801