Suresh Kumar Aggarwal vs Royal Kitchen Appliances Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 974 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A claim that a debt has been adjusted through a third-party arrangement, where the corporate debtor's reply to the demand notice under Section 8(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 does not assert a pre-existing dispute and does not deny that the debt is payable, does not displace the existence of an operational debt; where the unpaid amount exceeds the threshold of one lakh rupees, the Adjudicating Authority is entitled to admit an application under Section 9.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Rajshekhar Rao and Mr. Aditya Gupta, Advocates ORDER
20.09.2019 The Respondent - 'M/s. Oyster Steel and Iron Private Limited'
(Operational Creditor) filed an application under Section 9 of the 'Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short, 'the I&B Code') for initiation of 'Corporate
Insolvency Resolution Process' against 'M/s. Royal Kitchen Appliances Private
Limited' (Corporate Debtor). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law
Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi by impugned judgment dated 19th August,
2019 having admitted the application, the present appeal has been preferred by
the Director of the 'Corporate Debtor'.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that there
is no 'debt' payable in fact and the debt has been adjusted. He relied on the
reply to the notice issued by the Respondent (Operational Creditor) under
Section 8(1) of the 'I&B Code'. The said reply has been given on behalf of the
'Corporate Debtor' on 28th December, 2018 in terms of Section 8(2) wherein the
total history of the business between the parties has been referred to. As clause
8(h) therein, it is informed that the 'Corporate Debtor' has good business
relations with M/s. Laxmi Wire Netting and Weaving Factory and request was
made on behalf of the 'Operational Creditor' to the above mentioned effect to 'M/s. Laxmi Wire Netting and Weaving Factory', which they accepted.
Resultantly, the remaining balance amount of Rs.1,42,08,140/- for invoices
raised on Royal appliances to the 'Operational Creditor' and the amount of
Rs.31,30,134/- payable for invoices raised on Royal appliances to 'Duke Sponge
& Iron Pvt. Ltd.' were adjusted against the amount with 'Operational Creditor'
and 'Duke Sponge & Iron Pvt. Ltd.' owed to 'M/s. Laxmi Wire Netting and
Weaving Factory'. It was informed that resultantly a sum of Rs.1,73,38,000/-
was reduced from the outstanding of the 'Operational Creditor' and 'Duke
Sponge & Iron Pvt. Ltd.' and in the account of 'M/s. Laxmi Wire Netting and
Weaving Factory'. The aforesaid fact shows that the appellant replied to the
Demand Notice received under Section 8(1), the 'Corporate Debtor' and merely
wanted to show that it is a third party amount which has been adjusted. There
is no ground to suggest that 'debt' is not payable. In the said reply, it has never
been stated that there is a 'pre-existing dispute' and therefore, we find that the
due amount payable is much more than Rupees One Lakh and the Adjudicating
Authority has rightly admitted the application under Section 9.
In absence of any merit, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)
[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical) /ns/sk Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 974 of 2019
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