Mr. Maheshkumar Bachubhai Patel ... vs M/S. Shubh Cotton & Anr. & Ors

IN THE MATTER OF: Maheshkumar Bachubhai Patel, Suspended Board of Director of Rajeshwari Cotspin Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Shubh Cotton & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Harmish K. Shah, Advocate.

For Respondents :

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

10.02.2026: Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This appeal has been filed against an order dated 17.09.2025, by which

Section 9 application filed by the respondent has been admitted.

3. Respondent filed an application claiming amount of

Rs.4,27,89,552.64/-. The adjudicating authority issued notice. The

corporate debtor filed its reply. After hearing the parties, adjudicating

authority has admitted Section 7 application, aggrieved by which order, this

appeal has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant challenging the order raised three

submissions. The first submission raised by the appellant is that application

is barred by time, since date of default mentioned in the application was

07.01.2020, whereas, the application was filed on August, 2023. It is further

submitted that the threshold was not fulfilled, since there was no running account and the last invoice which was only of Rs.19 lakhs and odd which

did not fulfil the threshold. He further submits that demand notice which

was issued on 29.04.2023, in which the details have been given on the

particulars of the operational debt of Rs.4,27,89,552/- and it was mentioned

that the default is made i.e., from 16.12.2019 till 29.04.2023, whereas the

application which was filed in Section 9 was not in accordance with the

demand notice, hence the application ought not to have been admitted.

5. We have considered the submissions of the counsel for the appellant

and perused the records.

6. Coming to the arguments on the limitation, admittedly the date of

default mentioned in Part IV is 07.01.2020 and the application was filed in

August, 2023. The operational creditor was clearly entitled for the benefit of

the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Re: Cognizance for

extension of Limitation' in [Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3/2020]

and the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 deserves to be excluded,

hence the application was not barred by time.

7. Coming to the question of threshold, the amount claimed in the demand

notice as well as Part IV is same i.e., Rs.4,27,89,552/-. The mere fact that

last invoice was of only Rs.19 lakhs and odd, hence the threshold is not

complete does not commend us. Part IV clearly pleaded in the application

that various invoices from 07.05.2019 to 31.12.2019 which invoices were

produced as Annexure - C to the application. Thus, threshold has to be

determined on basis of the invoices taking all the invoices and cannot confine

to only last invoice of Rs. 19 lakhs. It was further pleaded that 9 cheques

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1856 of 2025 2 of 3 were given of various amounts to the operational creditor which all were

dishonoured and which cheques were issued subsequent to date of invoice

which is noted in the impugned order. We, thus are of the view that the

application fully fulfils the threshold and there is no substance in the said

argument.

8. The last submission made by the appellant is that Part IV of the

application has to be in accordance with the demand notice. As noted above,

demand notice also claimed amount, the amount in default

Rs.4,27,89,552/- whereas in the demand notice, it was mentioned that the

default is made from 16.12.2019 till 29.04.2023, whereas in Part IV of the

application, statement has been made that various invoices dated 07.05.2019

to 23.12.2019 was issued which has been filed as Annexure - C. We do not

find any inconsistency with the demand notice and Part IV so as to hold the

application not maintainable. Thus, the above submission also does not have

any substance.

9. The adjudicating authority after recording the finding of debt and

default has admitted Section 7 application in which we do not find any error.

The appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) himanshu/md

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1856 of 2025 3 of 3