Sudhir Kumar Jha vs Kasa Anlagen India Private Limited & Anr

IN THE MATTER OF: Sudhir Kumar Jha ...Appellants

Versus Kasa Anlagen India Private Limited & ...Respondents Anr.

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Abhinav Kardekar, Mr. Ayush Singh Solanki and Harshita Gupta, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Ajit Anekar and Urvi Vaidya, Advocates for R-1. ORDER

(Virtual Mode) 02.06.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 06th April, 2022 by

which the Adjudicating Authority has admitted the Application filed under

Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC in short) by the

Respondent-Operational Creditor.

3. The Adjudicating Authority has returned a finding that 'debt and default'

is proved and further held that Balance Sheets and the authenticated ledger

accounts of the Corporate Debtor clearly reflect uncleared debt of more than Rs.

1 Lakh the then threshold limit for initiation of CIRP under IBC, 2016.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that notice, invoking MOU to

arbitration clause was issued on 17.11.2013 by the Appellant hence it suggests 2

that there was pre-existing dispute. On a pointed query, Learned Counsel for the

Appellant submits that although notice was issued in 2013 but no arbitration

proceeding was instituted thereafter. The Notice under Section 8 of the IBC was

issued in the year 2019 i.e. more than 6 years thereafter.

5. We are not in agreement with the submissions that notice of invocation

itself proves the pre-existing dispute when no further steps were taken in

pursuance of the said notice for six years.

6. We are of the view that 'debt and default' having been proved, no error was

committed by the Adjudicating Authority in admitting the Application under

Section 9 of the IBC. The Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)

Basant/nn

Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 624 of 2022