Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Anandtex International Pvt Ltd vs Avon Cottex Pvt Ltd

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal25 March 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A debit note raised by the corporate debtor after the operational creditor's demand notice under Section 8(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 cannot be taken into consideration to dispute the operational debt on an application under Section 9, where there is nothing on record to show that it was raised and forwarded to the operational creditor before the demand notice was issued.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 239 of 2019IN THE MATTER OF:

Sh. Suresh Garg ...Appellant

Vs.

Avon Cottex Private Limited & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Ashish Middha, Advocate.

O R D E R

25.03.2019─ This appeal has been preferred by the Director/

Shareholder of 'Anandtex International Private Limited'- ('Corporate

Debtor') against the order dated 20th February, 2019 passed by the

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh

Bench, Chandigarh. By the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority

admitted the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the Respondent- 'M/s. Avon Cottex

Private Limited'- ('Operational Creditor').

2. From the records, it is clear that the Adjudicating Authority noticed

that the amount of Rs. 27,80,211/- is pending against the 'Corporate

Debtor'. The parties filed copies of the records including the ledger

account of the 'Corporate Debtor' and its books of accounts (Diary No.

2031 dated 6th June, 2018). A copy of e-mail sent by the 'Corporate

Debtor' on 30th January, 2018 and the account statement and

Contd/-..........

-2-

reconciliation state to the 'Corporate Debtor' was also brought to the

notice of the Adjudicating Authority. Taking into consideration all the

records, the application under Section 9 filed by the 'Operational Creditor'

was admitted.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submitted

that the total amount of Rs. 27,80,211/- has been paid. When asked to

refer any of the record including the instrument, if any, by which the

amount has been paid to the 'Operational Creditor', learned counsel for

the Appellant submitted that the 'Corporate Debtor' had sent a 'debit

note' to the 'Operational Creditor'. However, there is nothing on the record

to suggest that the 'debit note' was raised and forwarded to the

'Operational Creditor' prior to demand notice under Section 8(1) of the

'I&B Code'. The subsequent 'debit note' cannot be taken into

consideration to decide the application under Section 9.

4. We find no ground to interfere with the impugned order dated 20th

February, 2019. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.

(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson

(Justice A.I.S. Cheema) Member(Judicial) Ar/g

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 239 of 2019

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free