Universal Woollen Mills vs Winsome Yarns Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency)No.554 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the corporate debtor raises a genuine pre-existing dispute, supported by a document (here, an email said to show a counter-claim and payment), the Adjudicating Authority is right to reject an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process; the appellate tribunal, in an appeal against such rejection, will not itself determine whether the disputed document is genuine or fabricated, since that question of fact cannot be decided in appellate proceedings.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Universal Woollen Mills ...Appellants
Vs
Winsome Yarns Ltd ...Respondents
Present: Mr Gautam Singh, Advocate for appellant. Mr. Pulkit Deora and Mr Sylvine Sarma, Advocates for respondent.
ORDER
13.03.2019- This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order 27.7.2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh whereby and whereunder application under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Cost, 2016 preferred by appellant for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against respondent (Winsome Yarns Ltd), Corporate Debtor has been rejected. The main plea taken by the appellant was that the Adjudicating Authority has rejected the application on the ground of pre-existing dispute.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent referred to an email dated 4th August, 2015 (Page 95 onwards) of the appellant to show that there is counter claim made by the respondent. The aforesaid letter refers to a balance confirmation dated 31st March, 2015 with regard to demand made to suggest that the amount was paid. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the email dated 4th August, 2015 is not a genuine email and is a fabricated copy of the email. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that it is genuine one. However, the question whether the email is fabricated or not cannot be decided by this Appellate Tribunal.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.554 of 2018 2
3. In view of the aforesaid existence of dispute the Adjudicating Authority right rejected in Section 9 application. In the circumstances no relief can be granted.
4. The appeal is dismissed. No cost.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice A.I.S. Cheema) Member (Judicial) Bm/sk
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.554 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