Case Law Details
Sterling and Wilson Private Limited Vs Embassy Energy Private Limited (NCLAT Chennai)
NCLAT Chennai rules that a sub-contractor, lacking a contractual relationship with the owner, is not entitled to prefer any claims against the owner. The case revolves around an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The absence of a contractual obligation between the appellant (sub-contractor/Operational Creditor) and the respondent (Corporate Debtor) is established, making the claims ineligible. As no direct goods or services were supplied to the respondent, no operational debt is deemed to exist.
Facts- The brief point that falls for consideration in this Appeal is whether the `Adjudicating Authority’ was justified in dismissing the `Application’ filed under Section 9 of the Code on the ground that there was no `Contractual Relationship’ between the `Appellant’ and the `Respondent’ herein.
Notably, IEDCL had sub-Contracted the work to the `Appellant’/`Operational Creditor’ herein. IEDCL is one of the subsidiaries of IL&FS Solar Power Limited (ISPL)/ the main Contractor which had entered into a contract with `Embassy Energy Private Limited’/the `Respondent’ herein for operation of the Solar Power Project. It can be seen from the `Agreement for Civil Works and Construction’ entered into between Embassy Energy Private Limited/`Respondent’, the owner and ISPL that except for Clause 6.1.1 which deals with the name of the sub-Contractor, any `Contractual Obligation’ with the `Appellant’ herein is not established by way of any Written Agreement.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
