Miss Lucy
← All judgments

B.Karthikeyan vs Nonstop Courier And Cargo Pvt Ltd

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal3 May 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A person who has paid money to a corporate debtor solely to obtain franchisee rights, and who has neither supplied goods nor rendered services to it, is not an "operational creditor" within the meaning of Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and an application under Section 9 by such a person is not maintainable.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALNEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 476 of 2019IN THE MATTER OF:

B. Karthikeyan ...Appellant

Versus

Nonstop Courier & Cargo Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. S. Ramajayam, Advocate

ORDER

03.05.2019 The Appellant filed an application u/s 9 of the Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short, the 'I&B Code') against 'M/s. Nonstop Courier

and Cargo Private Limited' which has been rejected by order dated 14th March,

2019 by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Division

Bench, Chennai. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits

that the respondent failed to refund the deposit amount of Rs. 2.50 Lakhs

deposited by the Appellant with the 'Corporate Debtor'. It is submitted that the

aforesaid amount of Rs. 2.50 Lakhs deposited to get franchisee rights over

Alwarpet and T. Nagar branches of 'M/s. Nonstop Courier and Cargo Private

Limited'.

2. From the aforesaid submission, it is clear that the Appellant has neither

supplied any goods nor provided any services and it has only deposited money

for Franchisee rights and as such it cannot be termed as 'Operational Creditor'

in terms of Section 9 of the I&B Code. In view of the matter the application

under Section 9 being not maintainable, we are not inclined to interfere with the 2

impugned order dated 14th March, 2019. However, we are not expressing any

opinion as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellant

can claim to be a 'Financial Creditor' for initiation of proceeding u/s 7 of the I&B

Code.

The appeal is dismissed with aforesaid observations.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)

[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical)

/ns/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 476 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