Mr. Avneet Goyal Proprietor Rb ... vs Radha Kishan Gobind Ram Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1388 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In a proceeding under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the Adjudicating Authority is not required to enter into evidence and record findings as a civil court would; it may prima facie reject an application on the basis of a defence raised by the corporate debtor which it finds to be valid, without conducting a full trial of the disputed debt. Where the Adjudicating Authority has rejected a Section 9 application prima facie on the ground of the corporate debtor's defence, the Appellate Tribunal will not interfere in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction absent an error warranting such interference; and dismissal of a Section 9 application does not preclude the operational creditor from pursuing any other remedy available in law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Avneet Goyal ...Appellant
Versus
Radha Kishan Gobind Ram Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Ashish Dholakia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gautam Bajaj and Mr. Arpit Kumar Singh, Advocates. For Respondent: Mr. Vinay K. Gupta and Mr. Mehul Gupta, Advocates.
ORDER
22.11.2022: This Appeal has been filed against the order dated
13.09.2022 by the Appellant who had filed Section 9 application claiming debt
and default. Corporate Debtor has opposed the application and filed a reply
stating that there was no supply and no delivery was received by the Corporate
Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority considering the submissions of the parties
accepted the case of the Corporate Debtor. The defence of the Corporate
Debtor was held to be valid defence and on the said ground the application
was rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that certain observations
have been made in the order which may be prejudicial to the Appellant, if the
matter is taken in a regular court for establishing case of the Appellant.
Cont'd.../ -2-
3. We are of the view that in Section 9 proceeding the Court has not to
enter into evidence and record findings like a Civil Court. Prima facie relying
on the defence of the Corporate Debtor the Section 9 application has been
rejected. We do not find any error in the rejection of section 9 application
which may warrant interference in the impugned order in exercise of our
appellate jurisdiction. Appeal is dismissed. We, however, make it clear that
the dismissal of Section 9 application shall not preclude the Appellant from
taking any such remedy as available in law.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical)
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1388 of 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