Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Flexi Plast Industries vs Shiva Lokenath Rice Mills Private ...

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal27 July 2022Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A Section 9 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 that is filed after the notification of 24th March, 2020 raising the minimum default threshold must satisfy that enhanced threshold; the notification is enforceable from its date of coming into operation and does not exempt applications founded on a demand notice issued before that date.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 798 of 2022IN THE MATTER OF:

Flexi Plast Industries ...Appellant

Versus

Shiv Lokna Thrice Mills Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Rishabh Govila, Advocate For Respondent:

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

27.07.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

2. Delay in re-filing this Appeal is condoned. This Appeal has been filed

against the Order dated 22nd March, 2022 by which Application filed by the

Appellant under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC

in short) has been dismissed. The Appellant has filed the Section 9 Application

of the Code on 28th October, 2021 for claiming debt of Rs. 14,15,672/- before

the Adjudicating Authority which was dismissed on 22nd March, 2020

observing that the Application does not fulfil the threshold limit which has

been made operational with effect from 24th March, 2020.

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant sought to contend that since the

Demand Notice was issued on 05th March, 2020, hence his Application was

maintainable.

-2-

4. The Notification dated 24th March, 2020 making amendment in

threshold does not carve out any exception with regard to the Demand Notice

as contended by Learned Counsel for the Appellant. Notification dated 24th

March, 2020 will become enforceable from the date it has come into operation

and Application filed thereafter has to fulfil the threshold as provided in the

Notification.

5. We thus do not find any error in the Order of the Adjudicating Authority

dismissing the Section 9 Application. The Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Justice M. Satayanarayana Murthy] Member (Judicial)

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

Basant/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 798/2022

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