# In the matter of Uttamkumar Motiramji Shambharkar Vs. Mithilanchal Constructions Through its Partner Abhishek Kumar & Anr. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 126 of 2022
& I.A. No. 577 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-04-25. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00520. The case involves an appeal against the order dated 25.01.2022 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 25 Apr 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00520
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/uttamkumar-motiramji-shambharkar-vs-mithilanchal-constructions-through-its-partn-9bf09d58

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against the order dated 25.01.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, Court – 2, which admitted an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the Operational Creditor (Respondent). The appellant filed an appeal against this order. During the proceedings, both parties filed I.A. No. 1146/2022, stating that a settlement had been reached via a Settlement Agreement dated 08.04.2022. The appellant's counsel submitted that the parties were on a negotiation table, and the appeal was adjourned. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) stated that they had not been paid any fees or expenses. The appellant's counsel referred to Para 9 of the Settlement Agreement,

…

## Facts

Uttamkumar Motiramji Shambharkar (Appellant) filed an appeal against the order dated 25.01.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT), Mumbai, which admitted an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by Mithilanchal Constructions (Respondent). During the proceedings, both parties filed I.A. No. 1146/2022, stating that a settlement had been reached via a Settlement Agreement dated 08.04.2022. The appellant's counsel submitted that the parties were on a negotiation table. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) stated that they had not been paid any fees or expenses. The appellant had deposited Rs. 1,49,450 under the orders of the Tribunal dated 08.02.2022.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Settlement Agreement between the Appellant and Respondent should be accepted and taken …

**Ratio:** The principle of upholding settlements and promoting amicable resolutions in insolvency

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that both parties had filed I.A. No. 1146/2022, stating that a

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that settlement agreements reached between parties during

…

**Application:** The court applied this principle by accepting the Settlement Agreement dated

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Shreesha…
- **Appellants:** Uttamkumar…
- **Respondents:** Mithilanchal…

## Timeline

- **2022-01-25 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, Court – 2…
- **2022-02-08 — Appellant D…**: Appellant deposited an amount of…

## 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/uttamkumar-motiramji-shambharkar-vs-mithilanchal-constructions-through-its-partn-9bf09d58