Contract Termination not triggered by insolvency is not barred by moratorium u/s. 14 of IBC: NCLAT Delhi

Pradeep Upadhyay Vs Bhadohi Industrial Development Authority (BIDA) (NCLAT Delhi)

NCLAT Delhi held that termination of contract not triggered by the insolvency of Corporate Debtor and therefore not barred by moratorium under section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [IBC]. Accordingly, appeal held as devoid of merit.

Facts- The present Appeal has been filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) against the impugned order dated 06.06.2025 of Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal. The Appellant seeks to set aside or modify the order dated June 6, 2025, passed by the Learned NCLT, New Delhi, Court-IV, in IA 1619/ND/2020 in CP (IB) 1581/ND/2019. They also request that the Respondent be directed to remove the blacklisting imposed on the Corporate Debtor. Furthermore, the Appellant prays for the release of retention money amounting to approximately Rs. 27,14,940, which is currently held by the Respondent, along with the release of the final payment of around Rs. 36,40,441.61 for the work completed. Beyond these specific monetary reliefs, the Appellant also asks the court to pass any other orders it deems fit and just, considering the facts of the case. These reliefs are grounded on the contention that the termination of the contract was triggered by the insolvency of the Corporate Debtor, and therefore, the moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code should protect against such termination.