NCLAT: Can’t Set Aside Liquidation Order u/s 33 IBC When 3rd Party has Taken Possession of Property  ||  NCLAT: Unless Amendment Application Filed, Authority Can’t Suo Motu Amend Date of Default  ||  Delhi HC Directs Removal of 'Kindpan' Trademark in Petition Filed by ‘Mankind’  ||  J&K HC: Limitation for Challenging Award Starts after Signed Copy is Received by Party  ||  Delhi HC: ‘High Speed’ Not Sufficient to Conclude Driver Acted in Rash and Negligent Manner  ||  Allahabad HC: Huge Difference between Executing a Particular Document and Being a Witness  ||  Kerala HC: Can’t Consider Co-Opted Members of Bar Council as Separate Class from Elected Members  ||  J&K HC: Govt. Failing to Communicate Rejection of Detenue’s Representation in Time Vitiates Order  ||  SC: Electricity Act Empowers State Commissions to Regulate Open Access Within their Respective States  ||  SC: Limitation Begins from Date of Registration of Sale Deed that Constitutes Constructive Notice    

Clicbrics Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ansal Housing Limited - (NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) (05 Apr 2023)

If the claim of an Operational Creditor is undisputed and the operational debt remains unpaid, CIRP must commence

MANU/NL/0312/2023

Insolvency

The present appeal filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC') by the Appellant arises out of the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. By the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority dismissed Company Appeal, the application filed by Operational Creditor (the present Appellant) under Section 9 of the IBC seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') against Corporate Debtor- Ansal Housing Limited (the present Respondent). Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeal has been preferred by the Operational Creditor.

There is a clear admittance of operational debt which was due and payable on the part of the Corporate Debtor and that the operational debt was beyond the threshold limit of Rs.1 lakh. Further, it is pertinent to add here that, the Corporate Debtor has admitted that not only was the Operational Creditor entitled to receive payment, but the payment claimed was made in terms of the MoU and invoices were annexed with the claim. It is also unequivocally clear that, even on the date of filing of reply to the Section 9 application by the Corporate Debtor, by their own admission, the operational debt which had become due and payable remained unpaid. Therefore, default had been committed qua the operational debt owed to the Operational Creditor.

In the judgment of S.S. Engineers v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., wherein it has been clearly held that, if the claim of an Operational Creditor is undisputed and the operational debt remains unpaid, CIRP must commence for IBC does not countenance dishonesty or deliberate failure to repay the dues of an Operational Creditor.

The operational debt which had admittedly become due and payable having not been disputed prior to issue of demand notice and not been discharged by the Corporate Debtor, this is a fit case for admission of CIRP. The Adjudicating Authority has erroneously rejected the application under Section 9 of IBC. Impugned order is set aside.

Tags : CIRP   ADMISSION   GRANT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved