Trade Affairs vs Borkar Colorpacks Pvt. Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 753 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the corporate debtor, before the operational creditor issued its demand notice under Section 8(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, has communicated to the operational creditor the existence of a dispute concerning the supply of goods, that pre-notice dispute is a ground on which the Adjudicating Authority may reject an application under Section 9 of the Code, notwithstanding that the dispute was not repeated or particularised in the subsequent reply to the demand notice.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Trade Affairs ...Appellant
Vs
Borkar Colorpacks Pvt. Ltd. ....Respondent
Present:
For Appellant: Ms. Shruti Iyer and Mr. Anandh K., Advocates. For Respondent:
ORDER
18.03.2019: The Appellant (Operational Creditor) filed application under
Section 9 of the I&B Code which has been rejected by the Adjudicating Authority
(National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench by impugned order dated 15th
October, 2018.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that there
is no existence of dispute and the Adjudicating Authority cannot decide dispute
raised by the Respondent subsequent to the issuance of demand notice under
Section 8(1) of the I&B Code. Referring to the Advocate's Reply dated 2nd
November, 2017, it was submitted that so called 'various disputes' with regard
to the material supplied as mentioned by Respondent were never highlighted nor
any dispute has been raised. About the quality of materials supplied the letter
dated 2nd November, 2017, as referred above reads as follows:- -2-
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 753 of 2018 -3-
3. In the present case we find that the demand notice under Section 8(1) was
issued by Appellant on 11th January, 2018 and prior to the same, Advocate on
behalf of the Corporate Debtor in reply to the notice given by the Appellant, by
letter dated 6th October, 2017, intimated that the Corporate Debtor has denied
the pending amount and there have been various disputes in the material
supplied by the Appellant. The copy of the letter dated 6th October, 2017 reads
as follows:-
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 753 of 2018 -4-
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 753 of 2018 -5-
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that no
dispute had been raised by the 'Corporate Debtor' with regard to supply of
materials and highlighted in letter dated 6th October, 2017. However, as we find
that by letter dated 6th October, 2017, the Corporate Debtor has highlighted that
there are various disputes about supply of material, and the said letter was
issued much prior to the issuance of Section 8(1) notice, we are not inclined to
interfere with the impugned order. In absence of any merit, the appeal is
dismissed. No costs.
[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice A. I. S. Cheema] Member (Judicial) am/gc
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 753 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