Kiranakart Technologies Pvt. Ltd Vs Hyretail Technologies Pvt. Ltd (NCLAT Chandigarh)
NCLAT Chandigarh held that receiver of goods who has paid advances is an operational creditor. Thus, petition allowed as amount admitted to be paid by Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor received in excess as advance meets the threshold limit for initiating CIRP u/s 9.
Facts- Kiranakart Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor) has filed the present petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 with a prayer to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Hyretail Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor).
Conclusion- Hon’ble Supreme Court in Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. vs Hitro Energy Solutions Pvt (2022) 7 SCC 164 has held that with respect to the fact that receiver of goods who has paid advances is also an Operational Creditor.
Held that the amount admitted to be paid by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor received in excess as advance meets the threshold limit for initiating CIRP u/s 9 as per the provision of section 4. In view of the admission made by the Corporate Debtor for an unpaid operational debt for an amount above the threshold limit, we have no other option but to admit the Petition. Thus, the present petition being complete and having established the default in payment of the Operational Debt for the default amount being above ₹1,00,00,000/-, the petition is admitted in terms of Section 9 (5)(i) of the IBC, 2016 and accordingly, moratorium is declared in terms of Section 14 of the Code.
