Amarendra Mohapatra Vs Daga Power Systems & Engineers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi)
Joint Venture Partner Treated as Operational Creditor Because Supply Component Was Separately Defined; Section 9 Insolvency Proceedings Sustained Because Corporate Debtor Acknowledged Supply Dues; NCLAT Rejects JV Defence Because Claim Related Only to Unpaid Supply Invoices; Operational Debt Established Because Corporate Debtor Availed GST Input Tax Credit on Invoices; Section 10A Defence Rejected Because Default Date Fell Outside Covid Suspension Period; NCLAT Says Acknowledged Supply Liability Exceeding ₹1 Crore Justifies CIRP Admission; Pre-Existing Dispute Plea Rejected Because Correspondence Showed Admitted Outstanding Dues; Insolvency Against Consortium Member Upheld Because Internal Agreement Clearly Allocated Payment Obligations; NCLAT Distinguishes Profit-Sharing JV Cases Because Claim Concerned Exclusive Supply Obligations.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Delhi Bench, upheld the admission of a Section 9 insolvency application filed against the corporate debtor by an operational creditor in relation to unpaid dues arising from a joint venture project executed for Odisha Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. (OPTCL).
The dispute arose from a Joint Venture/Consortium Agreement entered into between the corporate debtor and the operational creditor for executing transmission line works awarded by OPTCL. Under the arrangement, the corporate debtor acted as the lead consortium member, while the operational creditor was assigned responsibility for the supply component of the project. Subsequently, an internal agreement dated 04.01.2019 and an addendum dated 11.02.2020 clearly defined the obligations of both parties. The operational creditor was required to execute the supply component and raise invoices upon the corporate debtor, while the corporate debtor was required to release payments after receiving corresponding amounts from OPTCL.
