Sandeep Behl Vs Nirmal Trading Company (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that admission of application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for initiation of CIRP of Corporate Debtor untenable due to pre-existing dispute surrounding operational debt.
Facts- The present appeal filed u/s. 61 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 by the Appellant arises out of the Order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority. By the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority has admitted the Section 9 application filed by M/s Nirmal Trading Company-Operational Creditor and admitted M/s Print Land Digital Pvt. Ltd.-Corporate Debtor into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeal has been preferred by the shareholder of the Corporate Debtor.
The short point for our consideration is whether there was any debt and default on the part of the Corporate Debtor qua the Operational Creditor and if so whether there was any pre-existing dispute surrounding the operational debt.
Conclusion- Held that the notice of dispute after the issue of the second demand notice as well as the third demand notice clearly signify that there was pre-existing dispute. Thus, the Adjudicating Authority committed serious error in admitting Section 9 application in the facts of the present case. The Impugned Order dated 30.10.2023 initiating CIRP of the Corporate Debtor and all other orders pursuant to Impugned Order are therefore set aside. The Corporate Debtor is released from the rigours of CIRP with immediate effect. The Resolution Professional shall however be paid his fees/expenses by the Operational Creditor. No costs.
