Sparta Global Projects Pvt. Ltd vs Kugd Services Pvt Ltd

IN THE MATTER OF: Sparta Global Projects Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus KUGD Services Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Ms. Swati Bhardwaj, Mr. Rajiv Virmani, Mr. Arjun Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Agarwal, Mr. Atul Malhotra, Advocates. For Respondent:

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

21.07.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 21st February, 2022.

By which Order, the Application filed by the Appellant under Section 9 of the

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC in short) has been rejected on the

ground that Appellant failed to serve Demand Notice under Section 8 of the Code

as well as the Notices issued by the Adjudicating Authority.

3. In the Application, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that

Appellant has served the Notice by email to the Director of the Corporate Debtor

and further the observations of the Adjudicating Authority that Applicant has

not placed on record the Master Data of the Corporate Debtor is not correct since in the Application itself the Master Data of the Corporate Debtor was filed.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Company Master Data was

already annexed with the Section 9 Application as Annexure 19 which has also

been placed along with the Additional Document before us.

4. In this Appeal, Notices were issued to the Respondent on 1st April, 2022.

Again on 11th May, 2022, this Tribunal passed following order;

"11.05.2022:

Affidavit of service has been filed.

Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the postal materials have been returned unserved although service effected on email.

Let the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant take steps for service by publication in two Newspapers having circulation in local areas one in English and second in Hindi within two weeks.

List this Appeal on 06th July, 2022."

5. In pursuance of the Order dated 11.05.2022, an Affidavit of Service has

been filed on 23rd May, 2022 where the Appellant has brought on record two

publications in the Newspapers "The Hindu" dated 18th May, 2022 and in the

"Rashtriya Sahara" dated 18th May, 2022 publishing the notice.

6. After having heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant, we are of the view

that observations made by the Adjudicating Authority that Master Data of the

Corporate Debtor has not been placed to establish the fact of sending the Notices

2 by email ID is incorrect. The email ID on which Notice was issued was very much

part of the Master Data and the service was effected on the said email ID.

7. Furthermore, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that neither

before the Adjudicating Authority nor before this Tribunal, the Respondent has

appeared. Notices in the two Newspaper having already been published under

the Orders of this Court, the Respondent did not appear. We are thus of the view

that ground for rejection of the Application under Section 9 of IBC was

erroneous. We set aside the Order dated 21st February, 2022 and direct the

Adjudicating Authority to pass an Order of admission of Section 9 Application

under IBC within a period of one month from the date when the Copy of the

Order is produced and to take further steps in accordance with the law.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy] Member (Judicial)

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

Basant/nn

3