NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 7(A), 8, 8(1), 9, 9(3)(B), 9(5), 14(1), 14(2), 14(3), 15, 17, 18, 20, 21OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016 AND REGULATION 6 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA (INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION PROCESS FOR CORPORATE PERSON) REGULATIONS, 2016

 

 

 

 

NAME

MOBILE NO.

E-MAIL I’D

RANJEET KUMAR

83830984789667769795

rk@courtkutchehry.com

JAI THAKUR

81307033349355723300

jai.thakur@courtkutchehry.com

RAJEEV RANJAN

9334553249

rajiv.ranjan@courtkutchehry.com

ASHOK MISHRA

9718327746

sales@courtkutchehry.com

RAVI KUMAR


ravi.singh@courtkutchehry.com

ADECCO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. BSES RAJDHANI POWER LIMITED, (2020) 07 NCLT CK 0001

NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity 'code') read with Rules 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority), 2016 (for brevity 'the Rules') with a prayer to initiate the Corporate Insolvency process against the Corporate Debtor. While allowing the application NCLT held that therefore, all that the adjudicating authority is to see at this stage is whether there is a plausible contention which requires further investigation and that the "dispute" is not a patently feeble legal argument or an assertion of fact unsupported by evidence. It is important to separate the grain from the chaff and to reject a spurious defense which is mere bluster. However, in doing so, the Court does not need to be satisfied that the defense is likely to succeed. The Court does not at this stage examine the merits of the dispute except to the extent indicated above. So long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudicating authority has to reject the application." In the present case, there is no such dispute as pre-existing, the dispute which was being claimed to be pre-existing by the corporate debtor did not survive. In the given facts and circumstances, the present application is complete and the Applicant is entitled to claim its dues, establishing the default in payment of the operational debt beyond doubt, and fulfillment of requirements under section 9(5) of the Code.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 248(1), 248(6), 252, 252(3) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND RULE 7,9 OF THE COMPANIES (REMOVAL OF NAMES OF COMPANIES FROM THE REGISTER OF COMPANIES) RULES, 2016

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 7, 12, 12(2), 19, 19(3), 66, 70 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016 AND REGULATION 3(1) OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA (INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION PROCESS FOR CORPORATE PERSONS) REGULATIONS, 2016