Disputed insolvency claim rejected where books, delayed invoices, and set-off evidence failed to prove an undisputed liability.

A claim in insolvency resolution proceedings was rejected because the applicant did not establish an undisputed debt due from the corporate debtor. The record did not show the claimed amount as payable in the debtor's books, the invoices were raised later as pro forma invoices, and there was evidence of a substantial set-off against amounts payable by the applicant to a group company. In these circumstances, the existence of liability remained seriously disputed, so the Resolution Professional's rejection of the claim was upheld and no admission was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the applicant's claim by the Resolution Professional was liable to be interfered with and the claim admitted in insolvency resolution proceedings.

Analysis: The claim was founded on alleged services rendered for July and August 2017, but the materials placed before the Tribunal did not establish an undisputed liability of the corporate debtor. The corporate debtor's records did not reflect the claimed amount as payable, invoices were raised much later as proforma invoices, and the record also showed a substantial set-off against amounts payable by the applicant to a group company. In these circumstances, the existence of debt and liability remained in serious dispute, and the claim could not be admitted merely on the basis of the documents produced by the applicant.

Conclusion: The rejection of the claim by the Resolution Professional was upheld and no interference was called for.

---