# In the matter of Saurav Garg Vs. Socrato Capital Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. CA(AT) (Insolvency) No. 1153-2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2019-12-06. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLAT-00052. Socrato Capital Private Limited, the Financial Creditor, filed an application under Section 7…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Dec 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLAT-00052
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/saurav-garg-vs-socrato-capital-pvt-ltd-anr-ca-152f0b49

## Summary

### Background

Socrato Capital Private Limited, the Financial Creditor, filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Tirumala Realcon Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench, admitted the application on October 31, 2019. The Appellant, Director, challenged the order, expressing intent to settle the matter. The Interim Resolution Professional was directed not to constitute the Committee of Creditors. The Appellant agreed to pay the total claimed amount of Rs. 2,48,41,009/- along with interest.

## Facts

Socrato Capital Private Limited (Financial Creditor) initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Tirumala Realcon Private Limited (Corporate Debtor) by filing an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application on October 31, 2019. Saurav Garg (Appellant), the Director, challenged the order, stating an intention to settle the matter. The Appellant agreed to pay Rs. 2,48,41,009/- along with interest. Demand drafts were issued by the Appellant to the Respondent. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) received only one claim from Socrato Capital Pvt Ltd. The Appellant handed over four demand drafts totaling Rs. 1,03,56,996/- to the Respondent's counsel. The Appellant agreed to pay

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the impugned order of admission of application under Section 7 of the I&B Code should …

**Ratio:** Rule 11 of NCLAT Rules, 2016 allows the appellate tribunal to set aside the impugned

…

**Reasoning:** The Appellant agreed to settle the matter and pay the claimed amount to the Respondent.

…

**Interpretation:** Rule 11 of NCLAT Rules provides the appellate tribunal with the power to set

…

**Application:** The court applied Rule 11 of NCLAT Rules, 2016, to set aside the impugned order

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Saurav…
- **Respondents:** Tirumala Realcon…; Socrato Capital…

## Timeline

- **2019-10-31 — Application A…**: The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application filed by Socrato Capital Private…
- **2019-11-06 — Appellant's Su…**: The Appellant's counsel submitted that the Appellant intends to settle the matter and pay…

## 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/saurav-garg-vs-socrato-capital-pvt-ltd-anr-ca-152f0b49