# In the matter of Vivek Bansal Vs. Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. CA(AT)(Ins)No. 552 of 2020

> NCLAT judgment dated 2020-07-14. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLAT-00197. The case involves a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 552 of 2020 before the National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 14 Jul 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLAT-00197
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/vivek-bansal-vs-burda-druck-india-pvt-ltd-anr-ca-4c2ff443

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 552 of 2020 before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi. The appeal was filed in relation to an insolvency resolution process initiated against a Corporate Debtor. The 'corporate insolvency resolution process' was commenced at the instance of the Respondent (Operational Creditor) in terms of the impugned order dated 27th May, 2020 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench –V. The Appellant filed I.A. No. 1534 of 2020 under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016, seeking to record a settlement between the parties.

## Facts

Vivek Bansal filed an appeal against Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. before the NCLAT. The 'corporate insolvency resolution process' was initiated by Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor) against a 'Corporate Debtor' based on an order dated May 27, 2020, by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi Bench –V. The parties reached a settlement where the 'Corporate Debtor' agreed to pay Rs.4,25,00,000/- to the Operational Creditor. The Appellant filed I.A. No. 1534 of 2020 seeking to record the settlement. The Committee of Creditors was not constituted. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed, but the NCLAT found the claimed expenses to be inflated. The NCLAT set aside the NCLT's order and allowed the Corporate Debtor to exit

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the settlement arrived at between the parties warrants setting aside the impugned order …

**Ratio:** Rule 11 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, allows for recording

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT considered the settlement agreement and the fact that the Committee of

…

**Interpretation:** The legal issue revolves around the enforceability and recognition of

…

**Application:** The NCLAT applied the ratio by setting aside the impugned order, allowing the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Bansi Lal…; Anant Bijay…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Vivek B…
- **Respondents:** Burda Druck India…

## Timeline

- **2020-05-27 — Impugned…**: Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi…
- **2020-07-07 — Settlement Ag…**: Settlement agreement entered between…

## 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/vivek-bansal-vs-burda-druck-india-pvt-ltd-anr-ca-4c2ff443