# In the matter of Sudhanshu Tripathi Vs. RBCL Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. A. No. 4657 of 2022 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1382 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-12-07. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00046. The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 7 Dec 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00046
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sudhanshu-tripathi-vs-rbcl-projects-pvt-ltd-anr-a-no-4657-of-2022-in-comp-app-755ceccf

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench (Court-II) dated 14.11.2022, which admitted an application under Section 9 of the IBC. An interim order was passed on 18.11.2022. I.A. No. 4354 of 2022 was filed claiming that a Settlement Agreement had been entered between the parties on 15.11.2022. The operational creditor submitted that Application I.A No. 4354 of 2022 should not be proceeded further since free consent was not obtained. The tribunal passed an order on 01.12.2022 regarding I.A. No. 4354 of 2022, which was an application filed by the Operational Creditor and Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor for disposal of the appeal in terms of the settlement agreement dated

…

## Facts

An appeal was filed against the Adjudicating Authority's order dated 14.11.2022, which admitted an application under Section 9 of the IBC. An interim order was passed on 18.11.2022. I.A. No. 4354 of 2022 was filed, claiming a Settlement Agreement was reached on 15.11.2022. The Operational Creditor argued against proceeding with I.A. No. 4354 of 2022 due to lack of free consent. The Adjudicating Authority admitted CIRP based on findings in Para 25, concerning disputes related to projects Astaire Garden and Discovery Park, with no pre-existing dispute regarding Project – Sentosa (Faridabad). The claim for the Sentosa project was Rs. 1,07,59,307/-, and the petition was filed on 17.05.2019, when the minimum threshold was Rs 1 Lakh. The Appellant offered to deposit Rs.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority's order …

**Ratio:** The court has the power to review and set aside orders of the Adjudicating Authority if

…

**Reasoning:** The court set aside the order dated 14.11.2022 after considering the settlement agreement

…

**Interpretation:** This indicates the court's willingness to prioritize settlements and ensure

…

**Application:** The court applied this principle by setting aside the Adjudicating Authority's

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Alok Sriv…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Sudhanshu T…
- **Respondents:** RBCL Projects…

## Timeline

- **2022-11-14 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench (Court-II)…
- **2022-11-15 — Settlement Ag…**: A Settlement Agreement was…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/sudhanshu-tripathi-vs-rbcl-projects-pvt-ltd-anr-a-no-4657-of-2022-in-comp-app-755ceccf