Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Beacon Courier & Cargo India Pvt. Ltd vs Trim India Pvt. Ltd

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal3 May 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an operational creditor's application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is opposed by the corporate debtor on the ground of a pre-existing dispute, the existence of such a dispute is established where the parties' own correspondence shows that the claim was under discussion and dispute between them before the demand notice, and where the corporate debtor has itself instituted civil proceedings in which it asserts a claim against the operational creditor arising from the same transactions.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 129 of 2019 IN THE MATTER OF: Beacon Courier & Cargo India Pvt. Ltd. .....Appellant Vs. Trim India Pvt. Ltd. ......Respondent Present : For Appellant: Mr. Krishnendu Datta with Mr. Puneet Singh Bindra, Mr. Sanampreet Singh, Advocates

For Respondents: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal with Mr. Gurcharan Singh, Advocates

O R D E R

03.05.2019 - This appeal has been preferred by Beacon Courier & Cargo India

Pvt. Ltd.('Operational Creditor') against order dated 2nd January, 2019 passed by

the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) (in short 'NCLT'),

New Delhi which rejected application u/s 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code

('I&B' Code), 2016 filed by the Appellant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Appellant submits that the

application has been rejected on the ground of pre-existing dispute between the

parties but the 'Corporate Debtor' in their suit filed, reflected a loan of

1,98,03,609.84, which suit has been filed after four months after the Demand

Notice was issued u/s 8(1) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code ('I&B') Code.

....contd.

2

Learned counsel appears on behalf of Respondent brought to our notice

number of e-mails including the e-mail dated 24th July, 2017 wherein the

meetings between the parties were communicated which shows that there was a

dispute between the "Beacon Courier & Cargo India Pvt. Ltd.('Operational

Creditor') and "Trim India Pvt. Ltd." which were to be closed within two weeks

and the parties were to finally settle by settlement on 8th August, which reads

as follows:-

"Subject : Minutes of Meeting 24.07.2017

As per our today's meeting below points are discussed:

1) As you assured us today that all the dispute related

between Beacon and Trim India will be close with 2

weeks and we will sit for final settlement on 8 th of

august.

2) We have given all the details or data desire by your

accounts team, still if you require any other

information or data do let us know till tomorrow.

3) After settlement of both the parties account you will

release our payment on mutual understanding

between us on same day.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 129 of 2019 ....contd.

4) Also plese share us the details of invoices of 15-16 financial year against which you have deducted our 60 lacs as a weight difference, we want to work on your adjustment so that we can clear our books.

Please acknowledge the same."

Learned counsel for the Appellant again referred to Suit No. 796 relied on

C.S.(Comm.) No. 796 of 2018 filed by the 'Corporate Debtor' before the Hon'ble

High Court of New Delhi wherein they suggest that they have accepted the

liability of Rs. 1,98,03,609.84. Apart from the fact that the suit has been filed

by Respondent, subsequently, we find that in the said suit the 'Corporate Debtor'

has claimed that it is liable to recover a sum of Rs. 3,15,99,172.84 with penal

and future interest @ 18% p.a.

The aforesaid fact shows that there is a pre-existing dispute which is also

corroborated and which was filed by 'Corporate Debtor'. In the aforesaid fact,

we are not interfering in the impugned order. In the absence of any merit, the

appeal is dismissed. No costs.

[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

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

[Kanthi Narahari] Member (Technical) ss/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 129 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