Voyages Booth vs Hwt Travels Pvt. Ltd

HWT Travels Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present:

For Appellant : Mr. Rajan Chaudhary, Advocate

ORDER

16.08.2019 Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the certified

copy of the impugned order dated 4th July, 2019 had been handed over on 24th

July, 2019 and it is also noticed from the certified copy issued by the National

Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench-III. He further submits that the appeal

has been filed on 7th August, 2019 and thereby there is no delay in filing if it is

counted from the date of receipt of the certified copy but formal condonation of

delay application has been filed.

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and taking into

consideration that the certified copy has been delivered on 24th July, 2019, we

find that there is no delay in filing the appeal.

I.A. No. 2504 of 2019 stands disposed of.

The Appellant - 'Voyages Booth' preferred an application u/s 9 of the

'Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2019 (for short, 'the I&B Code') against the

Respondent - 'HWT Travels Private Limited. The Adjudicating Authority 2

(National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi, Bench-III by the impugned order

dated 4th July, 2019 dismissed the application taking into consideration the

stand taken by the 'Corporate Debtor' and in absence of any record to suggest

that the Appellant comes within the meaning of 'Operational Creditor', referred

to the reply, which mentioned:

"ii. The Applicant has not submitted any documents

in which there is any specific word "of grant of

agency and working for the company"

mentioned. Further, the Applicant has not

submitted a single paper in which there is any

specification regarding assignment of any kind

of job by the answering Respondent to the

Applicant.

iii. The Respondents deny any relation with the

Applicant. It is noteworthy that the Applicant

has not submitted a single document showing

that any transaction between the parties had

ever occurred. Moreover, the Applicant has

miserably failed to file any

bills/invoices/demands raised by the

Applicant."

In paragraph 3 of the Impugned order, it was held :

"3. We have gone through the details of documents

filed by both the parties and heard the

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 824 of 2019 3

arguments of both the counsels. The agreement

placed on record by the Applicant is incomplete

and not signed by either party and thus, not

conclusive regarding the relationship of the two

parties. The Applicant has not enclosed any

invoices raised by the Applicant and payable by

the Respondent for the services rendered. The

deduction of TDS is not sufficient for us to infer

the nature of relationship that existed between

the parties. Thus, the Applicant has failed to

bring on record anything to establish the

transactions which took place between the

parties and that debt is due to the Applicant

from the Respondent as a consequence of the

transaction."

Learned counsel for the Appellant relied on the 'Statement of Accounts'

but they do not reflect any relationship of 'Operational Creditor' and the

'Corporate Debtor'. It alleged that the Appellant was working on behalf of the

'Corporate Debtor'. Reliance has been placed on the document dated 29th

January, 2016, which is extracted below:

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 824 of 2019 4

The aforesaid document do not suggest that the 'Corporate Debtor'

engaged the Appellant as the Agency of the company. It is a mere information

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 824 of 2019 5

given to the Appellant but no acceptance of the same was placed on record before

the Adjudicating Authority or before this Appellate Tribunal.

For the reason aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the aforesaid

order. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)

[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical) /ns/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 824 of 2019