Pradeep Thakore vs Mfc Transport Private Limited

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 906 of 2021 IN THE MATTER OF: Mr. Pradeep Thakore ...Appellant Vs. MFC Transport Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent Present: For Appellant: Ms. Komal Mundhra, Ms. Shipra Jain, Mr. Saurabh Agrawal, Mr. Shantanu Singh, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Vishal Kanade, Mr. Tejas M. Deshpande, Advocates

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

15.11.2021: This Appeal u/s 61 of the 'Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code',

2016 (IBC) has been filed against the order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the

'Adjudicating Authority' ('National Company Law Tribunal)', Mumbai Bench,

Court No. III by which the application filed by the Appellant initiating 'Corporate

Insolvency Resolution Process' (CIRP) has been rejected.

2. The notice was issued by the Appellant claiming to be the 'Operational

Creditor'(OC) u/s 8(1) of the 'I&B' Code, 2016 demanding the arrears of a salary

amounting to Rs. 29,82,500/- which notice was immediately replied within 10

days as required on 30.05.2019. In the reply to notice, the Respondent has

submitted that the salary of the Appellant was reduced after assessment of the

performance to Rs. 12 lacs p.a. instead of Rs. 24 lacs which he was getting

earlier. Facts of dispute has been stated in para 10 and 11 of the reply to the

notice. The 'Adjudicating Authority' had noticed that the dispute has been raised

by the Respondent hence, the application has been rejected. Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 906 of 2021 1

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order contends that

there was no pre-existing dispute since there was no communication to the

Appellant regarding any dispute.

4. We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant and perused the

records.

5. From the material which is brought on record, it does appear that after

August 2017 till March 2019, the Appellant was in employment and receiving

salary @12 lacs p.a. In the reply to the notice u/s 8(1) of the 'I&B' Code, 2016,

specific mention of the dispute has been made relying on which the 'Adjudicating

Authority' has rejected the application u/s 9 of the 'I&B' Code.

6. We are satisfied that there was reasons to accept that the dispute was

raised in the reply notice within the meaning of Section 9 of the 'I&B' Code. We

find no error in the impugned order, the appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Justice Jarat Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical) Shashi/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 906 of 2021 2