Napin Impex Limited vs Unistone Panels Private Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1333 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the existence of the operational debt is seriously disputed by the corporate debtor on the basis of a plausible plea that goods were never received, the Adjudicating Authority in proceedings under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 cannot go into and adjudicate that dispute, and an application rejected on that ground does not warrant interference in appeal. The findings of the Adjudicating Authority on the factual dispute do not bind the creditor in any other proceedings: observations made in Section 9 proceedings on whether goods were supplied shall not stand in the way of the operational creditor pursuing appropriate remedies before a competent court.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Napin Impex Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Unistone Panels Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Present but appearance not marked. For Respondent:
ORDER
11.11.2022: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has
been filed against order dated 04.08.2022 passed by National Company Law
Tribunal, Cuttak Bench by which application filed by Appellant under Section
9 for operational debt has been rejected. The Adjudicating Authority has
returned finding after considering the materials on record that goods were
never supplied relying on plea which was taken in reply filed by the Corporate
Debtor.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant challenging the order contends that
the Adjudicating Authority has relied only on the affidavit filed by the alleged
transporter - 'M/s Rahul Goods Carriers' which is not sufficient material to
return finding that goods were never supplied to the Corporate Debtor.
3. We are of the view that there being serious dispute raised in the
application under Section 9 regarding receipt of goods by the Corporate Debtor
such issues cannot be gone into and adjudicated in the Section 9 proceedings.
Cont'd.../ 2
It is open for the Appellant to seek appropriate remedy before the Competent
Court after establishing that goods were supplied for his dues, as permissible
in law. We make it clear that in appropriate proceedings before Competent
Court, if any, initiated by the Appellant, any observations made by the
Adjudicating Authority in Section 9 proceedings shall not come in the way.
Appeal is dismissed with observation as above.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1333 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