Solver Ltd., the Operational Creditor (OC), supplied Jute bags to Atren Ltd., the Corporate Debtor (CD) through 12 invoices for ₹78.63 lakh during a period of May 2015 to November 2016. The OC claimed its amount from the

CS Professional · Insolvency - Law and Practice · PYQS · June 2022
Solver Ltd., the Operational Creditor (OC), supplied Jute bags to Atren Ltd., the Corporate Debtor (CD) through 12 invoices for ₹78.63 lakh during a period of May 2015 to November 2016. The OC claimed its amount from the date of acknowledgement i.e. 12th December, 2017 with interest. The CD sent a Legal Notice (Notice of Dispute) on 20th September, 2018 after that it was assured that the outstanding amount will be paid within a month, but no outstanding debt was paid. It also mentioned that past payments and return of material were not factored in raising the demand. The OC raised demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC again on 12th October, 2018 which was delivered on 27th October, 2018. The CD sent a reply on 31st October, 2018 to the aforesaid demand notice wherein it mentioned that the material worth ₹10.65 lakh were returned on 23rd June, 2017, owing to the quality issue and the same were duly received and acknowledged by the Operational Creditor, so dispute was raised. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) rejected the application of OC. The OC referred the matter before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). Referring the relevant case, explain whether the OC will succeed before NCLAT?

Answer & Explanation:

As per Solenis Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Arjun Pulp and Paper (India) Private Limited Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 2(b) 707 of 2020 the Adjudicating Authority has rightly dismissed the Application under Section 9 of the IBC filed by the Appellant holding that there is pre-existing dispute prior to issuance of Demand Notice. Section 5(6) of IBC which defines the term 'dispute' which includes a suit or arbitration proceedings relating to- the existence of the amount of debt; the quality of goods or service; or the breach of a representation or warranty." As per Section 9(5)(ii)(d) the Adjudicating Authority may reject the application and communicate such decision to the operational creditor and the corporate debtor, if notice of dispute has been received by the operational creditor or there is a record of dispute in the information utility. The Letter dated 20th September 2018, sent by Respondent through Advocate, clearly shows that the dispute existed prior to issuance of Demand Notice. Having regard to the foregoing discussion, the Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the impugned order suffers from any legal infirmity. The Appeal is dismissed. Hence, if there is any pre-existing dispute, the claim of the Operational Creditor cannot be entertained by the Adjudicating Authority.

Topics: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic