Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Nikunjwoods Pvt Ltd vs Aakruti Boardlam Private Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal29 July 2022Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The reasoning in this order is short, and it rests on one principle: an operational creditor's Section 9 application must independently satisfy the statutory requirements, including the minimum default threshold, and an earlier, dismissed Section 7 application cannot be used to backdate its filing date to a point when the default threshold may have been met.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHIComp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 829 of 2022In the matter of:

M/s. Nikunj Woods (P) Ltd. ....Appellant Vs.

M/s. Aakruti Boardlam (P) Ltd. ...Respondent For Appellant: Mr. Anirudh Gupta, Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocates.

For Respondents: Mr. Mandeep Singh Saluja, Advocate.

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

29.07.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 09.05.2022 passed

by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad,

Division Bench, Court-1, by which order the Adjudicating Authority has

rejected the Application on the ground that it does not fulfil the threshold of

Rupees One Crore although Application was filed on 16.02.2022.

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that he has earlier filed

Section 7 Application which was dismissed for non-prosecution and thereafter

Section 9 Application was filed. Hence, his Section 9 Application be treated to

have been filed on the date he filed Section 7 Application.

4. We are of the view that the prayer of the Appellant to treat his Section 9

Application was filed on the date when he filed Section 7 Application cannot

be accepted. In the Section 9 Application, statutory requirements have to be 2

fulfilled and no error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority in

rejecting Section 9 Application on the ground that it does not fulfill the

threshold.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy] Member (Judicial)

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Anjali/nn

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 829 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