Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2019) 12 NCLT CK 0756

M/s P L Industries vs M/s Gautami Chemicals And Pesticides Private Limited

National Company Law Tribunal · Decided on 13 December 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Janab Mohammed Ajmal, Member Judicial
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
IA No. 41 of 2019 in TCP No. 20/9/AMR/TP/2019 [CP (IB) No. 271/9/HDB/2019]

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 387 words

ORDER

IA No. 41 of 2019:

Counsel for the Applicant is Present. The Application is allowed vide separate sheets. The CP is allowed to be withdrawn.

TCP (IB) No. 20/9/AMR/2019 {CP (IB) No. 271/9/HDB/2019}:

The Company Petition is dismissed as withdrawn under Rule 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 as per the order dated 13.12.2019 in IA No. 41 of 2019. The Petitioner, if so advised, is at liberty to initiate a fresh petition in case the case of action survives and limitation permits. There would however be no order as to costs.

This is an Application under rule 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 (the Rule for short) (mistakenly filed under section 82 of the NCLT Rules, 2016) seeking withdrawal of the Company Petition.

2.

The Applicant herein, an Operational Creditor of the Respondent (Corporate Debtor), brought in an Application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code for short), claiming default in payment of an operational debt to the tune of Rs. 4,42,183/- (Rupees Four lakhs forty two thousand one hundred eighty three only) against the Respondent. While the matter was being heard the petitioner felt that the Petition may not succeed due to some typographical and manual errors in the notice as well as the nomenclature of the Applicant Firm (Operational Creditor) in the Company Petition. It accordingly filed the present Application seeking leave of this authority to withdraw the Company Petition.

3.

The matter was heard. The Respondent raised no objection to the Application nor did it file a counter.

4.

Rule 8 of the Rules permits withdrawal of the Application made inter alia under 6 Rule of the Rules, before its admission. The Company Petition filed at the instance of the Applicant is one under section 9 of the Code read with Rule 6 of the Rules. Since the Petitioner (Applicant) seeks its withdrawal, it can be allowed. Hence ordered.

ORDER

The application be and the same is allowed on contest. TCP (IB) No. 20/9/AMR/TP/2019 {CP (IB) No. 271/9/HDB/2019} is dismissed as withdrawn. The Applicant/Petitioner however is at liberty to file a fresh Application, if so advised, in case the cause of action survives and limitation permits. There would however be no order as to costs.