2017 (9) TMI 1877 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its debt - dispute in existence - HELD THAT - There is an existence of dispute with regard to supply of goods and materials. In spite of notice under section 433(e) and 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act 1956 and receipt of reply no steps was taken by the appellant. Much thereafter application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was filed - there are no reason to interfere with the impugned order wherein the Adjudicating Authority held that there is an existence of dispute Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.
2. Existence of dispute regarding supply of goods and materials.
3. Rejection of the application by the Adjudicating Authority based on the existence of a dispute.

Issue 1: Application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process:
The Appellant, an Operational Creditor, filed an application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority, the National Company Law Tribunal, rejected the application citing the existence of a dispute.

Issue 2: Existence of dispute regarding supply of goods and materials:
The dispute in question arose from a letter by the Appellant stating that goods and materials worth a certain amount were supplied to the Corporate Debtor, with a balance payment pending. However, the Corporate Debtor replied denying the receipt of the goods and materials, stating that the claims were false and disputed. This exchange of letters indicated a clear dispute regarding the supply of goods and materials between the parties.

Issue 3: Rejection of the application by the Adjudicating Authority based on the existence of a dispute:
The Appellant argued that there was no existing dispute and referred to a previous decision of the Appellate Tribunal. They contended that a dispute, especially if raised for the first time and lacking genuineness, should not be a ground for rejecting the application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. However, the Respondent maintained that a dispute did exist, as acknowledged by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal, after considering the letters exchanged between the parties, found that a dispute regarding the supply of goods and materials was evident. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the Adjudicating Authority's decision based on the existence of a dispute.

In conclusion, the judgment by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, emphasized the importance of resolving disputes before initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The decision highlighted the significance of clear communication and documentation in such cases, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to the existence of a dispute between the parties involved.