Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Invoice Discounters Of Riva Perfumes ... vs Riva Perfumes Llp

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal27 March 2024Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A claim arising from the discounting of invoices, where the underlying transaction is a sale and purchase of goods and the discounting relates to receivables under those invoices, is an operational debt within the meaning of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and a creditor holding such a claim is an operational creditor who cannot maintain an application under Section 7 of the Code.

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. 518 of 2024IN THE MATTER OF:

Invoice Discounters of Riva Perfumes LLP Represented by Minion Ventures Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Riva Perfumes LLP ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Siddhant Jaiswal, Advocate. For Respondent: Ms. Shalya Agarwal and Mr. Dhananjaya Sud, Advocates.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

27.03.2024: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has

been filed against order dated 10.01.2024 by which the Adjudicating Authority

has dismissed Section 7 application filed by the Appellant. The Appellant is

an entity who has discounted invoices raised by the Respondent as part of an

arrangement through online bill/invoice discounting portal called "KredX"

operated by one Minions Ventures Pvt. Ltd. The agreement was entered

between the Appellant with the Minions Ventures Pvt. Ltd. The Appellant who

discounted the invoices when ultimately did not get payment filed Section 7

application. The Adjudicating Authority relying on the judgment of this

Tribunal "V.R. Ashok Rao & 24 Ors. Vs. TDT Copper Ltd., Company Appeal (AT)

(Ins.) No. 780 of 2022" rejected the application holding that the debt in

question is only an operational debt and the Appellant is an Operational

Creditor.

Cont'd.../ -2-

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant challenging the order contends that

the Adjudicating Authority committed error in observing that the agreement

was not on the record. Further, an appeal has been in the Hon'ble Supreme

Court against the judgment of Appellate Tribunal in "V.R. Ashok Rao & 24 Ors.

Vs. TDT Copper Ltd." where notices have been issued in Civil Appeal Diary

No.20458 of 2023, hence, the Appellant has prayed for adjournment sine die

of the application, which was not granted.

3. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the

Appellant and perused the record.

4. Both the Appellant and the Seller are registered on the portal called

"KredX" operated by one Minions Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Appellant has discounted

the invoices which invoices were of the seller, against the receivables under

the invoices. We have also looked into the Agreement for Transfer of Rights

between the Seller and the Purchaser, who were referred as parties to the

Agreement dated 19.04.2023 as well as another Agreement dated 27.04.2023

between the Seller and the Minions Ventures Pvt. Ltd. The transaction as

reflected in the agreement is a transaction for sale and purchase of goods and

invoice discounting which was invoice discounting regarding receivable under

the invoice and at best the claim of the Appellant is Operational Debt for which

Section 7 application was not maintainable. We are of the view that the

Adjudicating Authority rightly rejected the application filed by the Appellant.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.518 of 2024 -3-

5. In so far as reference to Civil Appeal Diary No.20458 of 2023 is

concerned, judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court when delivered shall bind all.

We only observed that in event the judgment as referred in the Civil Appeal is

decided in favour of the Appellant, there shall be liberty to revive the

proceedings. With these observations, we dismiss the Appeal.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.518 of 2024

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