J.P. Engineers Private Limited vs Murti Udyog Limited

IN THE MATTER OF: J.P. Engineers Private Limited ...Appellant

Vs. Murti Udyog Limited ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Sharad Tyagi, Advocate. For Respondent: - Mr. Ajay Kohli, Advocate.

ORDER

19.04.2018- This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant against

the order dated 8th November, 2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority

(National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench, New Delhi, whereby

and whereunder the application preferred by the Appellant under Section

9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to

as "I&B Code") has been rejected on the ground that the Respondent has

raised dispute with sufficient particulars.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the demand

notice under sub-section (1) of Section 8 was issued on 13th June, 2017.

Thereafter, the amount having not paid, the application under Section 9

of the 'I&B Code' was filed on 13th September, 2017. The Respondent

Contd/-...................

-2-

thereafter filed suit on 12th December, 2017 i.e. much after filing of the

application under Section 9 of the 'I&B Code' which cannot be taken into

consideration to hold that there is an 'existence of dispute'.

3. The Respondents have filed reply and further affidavit and taken

plea that the amount as was due was already paid to the Appellant by

cheques, the details of which were brought to the notice of the

Adjudicating Authority. However, such submission has been disputed by

the Appellant. According to the Appellant, the Chartered Accountant has

certified that the amount has not been paid.

4. Admittedly, there is no 'existence of dispute' relating to supply of

goods or its quality as were supplied by the Appellant. Therefore, it

cannot be stated that there is an 'existence of dispute'. However, what

we find that the Respondent has disputed the debt as has been claimed

by the Appellant. According to them, they have already paid and satisfied

the claim amount by making payment through cheques.

5. The scheme of the 'I&B Code' fell for consideration before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Innoventive Industries Limited V/s. ICICI

Bank & Anr.─ (2018) 1 SCC 407" , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court

taking into consideration the provisions of the Code held that the

'Corporate Debtor' is entitled to point out that default has not occurred

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 321 of 2017 -3-

in a sense that the 'debt', which also may include a disputed claim, is not

due.

6. In the present case, the Adjudicating Authority having noticed that

the Respondent has satisfied with the evidence that there is no default

on the part of the Respondent and the 'debt' is not due, we find no ground

to interfere with the finding of the Adjudicating Authority.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No cost.

(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson

(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial) Ar/uk

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 321 of 2017