Nisheet Ranjan vs Letstark Tech Pvt. Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 350 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the corporate debtor has raised a counter-claim and the operational creditor's claim is therefore disputed as to whether any amount is payable, an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is not maintainable; the adjudicating authority is not the forum to determine which portion of the claim and counter-claim is recoverable.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Nisheet Ranjan ...Appellant
Vs.
Letstark Tech Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Gaurav Mankotia, Advocate
ORDER
09.07.2018─ The appellant an employee of 'Letstark Tech Private
Limited' (Corporate Debtor) filed an application under Section 9 of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'I&B
Code') which has been rejected by the Adjudicating Authority (National
Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh by impugned order
dated 31st May, 2018 on the ground of 'existence of dispute'.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that
there was no existence of dispute and in fact with regard to the admitted dues
TDS amount from the salary of the appellant has already been deducted by
the Corporate Debtor but in spite of the same the salary has not been paid.
3. From the records, we find that the 'Corporate Debtor' enclosed
Annexure A-5 with the reply disclosing the year-wise statement of the 'amount
payable', 'amount to be deducted for late coming', 'amount actually paid', 'TDS
deposited' thereby it was shown the amount due since the year 2008 to 2017
amounting to Rs.28,84,160 and after adjusting the same certain amount is
recoverable from the appellant. The Adjudicating Authority, after verification 2
of the record, held that it is not the Forum to examine as to which portion of
the claim of the 'Operational Creditor', and the counter claim made by the
'Corporate Debtor' is recoverable or due or can be said to be defaulted. There
being a dispute about the debt as to any amount is payable or not, the
Adjudicating Authority held that the application under Section 9 was not
maintainable.
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of
the record, we find no ground to differ with the grounds shown by the
Adjudicating Authority. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No cost.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial)
/ns/sk
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 350 of 2018
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