Ch Mohd Sharief Tariq, Member - (1.) Counsels for both the parties are present. As seen from the order dated 15.12.2017, the CIRP was initiated against the Corporate Debtor. However, no IRP has been appointed because the Registry was directed to make a reference to the IBBI for recommending the name of the IRP. Now, both the Counsels have filed 'compromise memo' stating therein that the matter has been settled between the parties and the outstanding debt claimed by the Applicant has been paid by way of 4 Demand Drafts as mentioned under para 3 (a) and (b) and instead of 'C two DDs are provided to the tune of Rs.2,70,0007- to be drawn at Kotak Mahindra Bank and Rs. 1,98,960/- to be drawn at Bank of India; the same are handed over to the Counsel for the Applicant. Counsel for the Applicant submitted that this is full and final settlement between the parties. In view of the fact that IRP has not been appointed and the Corporate Debtor has settled the outstanding debt of the Applicant. Therefore, there is no requirement to continue the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. Hence, the order dated 15.12.2017 is recalled. The Applicant has prayed for withdrawal of the Petition. The prayer is allowed and the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.;