Petition admitted against company for payment default under Insolvency Code

The petition filed by an individual against a company for defaulting on payment of consulting services under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was admitted. Despite statutory demand notices and evidence presented, the Corporate Debtor did not respond, leading to the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional. The judgment declared a moratorium, prohibited suits against the Corporate Debtor, ensured essential services continued, and appointed the Interim Resolution Professional to manage the resolution process effectively.

---

---

Issues:
1. Default in payment of consulting services by Corporate Debtor.
2. Petition filed under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
3. Compliance with statutory demand notices.
4. Lack of response from Corporate Debtor.
5. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional.

Analysis:

1. The judgment pertains to a petition filed by an individual against a company for defaulting on payment of consulting services. The petitioner sought relief under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, due to non-payment of a substantial amount for services provided during the financial year 2017-2018.

2. The petitioner established that the Corporate Debtor failed to pay the outstanding amount despite statutory demand notices being issued as required under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The petitioner provided evidence such as demand notices, invoice copies, and bank statements to support the claim of default by the Corporate Debtor.

3. The Operational Creditor, through its counsel, presented the case before the Adjudicating Authority, highlighting the completeness of the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. It was emphasized that no repayment had been made, and all necessary notices and invoices had been duly delivered to the Corporate Debtor without any dispute or response.

4. The Corporate Debtor did not contest the claim or respond to the notices served, leading to a lack of representation or defense in the proceedings. The absence of any reply from the Corporate Debtor further strengthened the case for admitting the petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

5. Subsequently, the Adjudicating Authority admitted the petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, declaring a moratorium and appointing an Interim Resolution Professional to oversee the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The judgment outlined specific directions regarding the moratorium period, prohibition of suits against the Corporate Debtor, continuation of essential services, and the appointment of the Interim Resolution Professional to manage the resolution process effectively.

---