G T Iron Store vs Amba Shakti Ispat Limited

In the matter of: G.T. Iron Store ....Appellant Vs. Amba Shakti Ispat Ltd. ...Respondent For Appellant Mr. Ravi Vashisht, Mr. Piyush Maurya, Advocates. For Respondent Mr. Aditya Madaan, Mr. Aishwarya Adlakha, Ms. Natasha, Mr. GP Madaan, Advocates.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

10.07.2024: Heard Counsel for the Appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating

Authority dated 22.12.2023 by which order Section 9 application filed by the

Appellant has been rejected.

3. We have directed the appellant to bring on record the notice of dispute

dated 28.02.2022 issued by the corporate debtor by our order dated

16.04.2024. The Appellant by means of an additional affidavit has brought the

said notice on the record which is at page 3 of the additional affidavit. The

notice of dispute given by the corporate debtor captures in detail the claim of

the corporate debtor that no debt is due nor an amount is due. Paragraphs 1

to 11 of notice of dispute details the happening and events which took place

and on basis of which it claims that no amount is due. 2

4. Counsel for the Appellant submits that there is no pre-existing dispute

and by notice of dispute cannot be treated to be pre-existence dispute.

5. We have considered the submission of the counsel for the appellant and

perused the record.

6. We have perused the notice of dispute given by the corporate debtor

dated 28.02.2022. We are of the view that the notice of dispute raises

substantial issue regarding denying the claim of the appellant and pre-existing

dispute is a writ large on the notice of dispute and submission of the appellant

cannot be accepted that there is no pre-existing dispute. The demand notice

was issued by the appellant on 15.02.2022 and the sequence of the events

captured in the notice of dispute were much prior to that. We, thus, are of the

view that the Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in rejecting

Section 9 application. However, it shall be open for the appellant to take such

remedy as available before the Competent Court for recovery of its dues, if any.

7. With these observations, we dismiss the appeal.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

Anjali/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 635 of 2024 & I.A. No. 2100 of 2024