# In the matter of Pooja Finlease Ltd. Vs.
Auto Needs (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 103 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-07-18. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00349. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 10.11.2021 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 18 Jul 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00349
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/pooja-finlease-ltd-vs-auto-needs-ba408989

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 10.11.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) New Delhi, Bench IV, which rejected the application filed by the Appellant, Pooja Finlease Ltd., a Financial Creditor, for the revival of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The CIRP was initially initiated against the Corporate Debtor, Auto Needs (India) Pvt. Ltd., based on an application filed by the Appellant under Section 7 of the I&B Code, with an order dated 20.12.2019. During the insolvency process, a settlement was reached between the parties, and Consent Terms dated 27.01.2020 were filed. However, the Appellant sought to revive the CIRP due to alleged default by the Corporate Debtor, which was rejected by the

…

## Facts

Pooja Finlease Ltd., the Appellant and a Financial Creditor, initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Auto Needs (India) Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor, under Section 7 of the I&B Code, which was admitted on 20.12.2019. During the CIRP, the parties reached a settlement, and Consent Terms were filed on 27.01.2020. Clause 8 of the Consent Terms stipulated that the Financial Creditor could revive the CIRP if the Corporate Debtor defaulted on the terms. The Adjudicating Authority passed an order on 05.02.2020. Subsequently, the Appellant filed an application seeking revival of the CIRP, alleging default by the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the revival application on 10.11.2021. The Appellant then filed an appeal against

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the Appellant's application for revival of …

**Ratio:** The legal principle is that when parties enter into Consent Terms that are taken on

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Adjudicating Authority should have considered Clause 8 of the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that Consent Terms, once taken on record, become an

…

**Application:** In this specific case, the court applied the ratio by holding that since the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; M. Satyanarayana…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Pooja Finlease…
- **Respondents:** Auto Needs…

## Timeline

- **2019-12-20 — CIRP Init…**: CIRP was initiated against the Corporate Debtor by order dated 20.12.2019 based on an…
- **2020-01-27 — Consent Term…**: Settlement reached between the parties, and…

## 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/pooja-finlease-ltd-vs-auto-needs-ba408989