# In the matter of Santasha Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. vs. Vani Advertising & Anr. Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 428 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-07-22. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00332. The case involves an appeal against an order related to an insolvency resolution process. A…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 22 Jul 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00332
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/santasha-real-estate-pvt-ltd-vs-vani-advertising-anr-company-appeal-f43b4868

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order related to an insolvency resolution process. A settlement agreement was reached between Santasha Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) and Vani Advertising & Anr. (Respondent). The Appellant claims to have paid Rs. 20 Lakhs to the Operational Creditor/Respondent No.1 as per the settlement terms. However, the Respondent No.1 has allegedly not taken necessary action to file a withdrawal application through the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The IRP/Respondent No.2 confirmed that they have not received the necessary application from the Operational Creditor/R1, and their fees are still due.

## Facts

Santasha Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. initiated a Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 428 of 2022 against Vani Advertising & Anr. A settlement agreement was reached between the parties on 2022-05-13. As per the settlement, Santasha Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. was to pay Rs. 20 Lakhs to Vani Advertising & Anr. The appellant claims to have made the payment. Clause 12 of the settlement agreement stipulated that the first party would bear the IRP expenses up to Rs. 25,000, payable directly to the IRP, with any amount exceeding that to be paid by the second party. The appellant's counsel informed the court that the respondent had not taken the necessary steps to withdraw the application. The IRP confirmed that they had not received the withdrawal application and that their fees were

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Respondent No.1 is complying with the terms of the settlement agreement regarding the …

**Ratio:** The ratio is based on the principle that parties must adhere to the terms of a settlement

…

**Reasoning:** The court noted that the Appellant had allegedly fulfilled their part of the settlement

…

**Interpretation:** The settlement agreement is interpreted as a binding contract between the

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio by observing that the Respondent's failure to take

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh…; Ashok Kumar…
- **Appellants:** Santasha Real…
- **Respondents:** Vani Advertising…

## Timeline

- **2022-05-13 — Settlement Ag…**: Settlement Agreement dated 13.05.2022 between the Appellant-Santasha Real Estate Pvt Ltd…
- **2022-04-21 — Tribunal…**: Order passed by the Tribunal dated 21.04.2022 will remain in force until the Adjudicating…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 12A — (1) Subject to sub](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-12a)

---

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/santasha-real-estate-pvt-ltd-vs-vani-advertising-anr-company-appeal-f43b4868