Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was maintainable when the challenge to the arbitral award was not pending on the date of demand notice and filing of the application, and whether any pre-existing dispute barred admission of the insolvency petition.
Analysis: The operational creditor had obtained an arbitral award, which was confirmed by the District Court. The corporate debtor's appeal against the award had been dismissed in default and, on the material before the Tribunal, was not pending when the demand notice was issued or when the Section 9 application was filed. The Tribunal applied the principle that an operational debt is treated as disputed only where a suit or arbitration proceeding concerning the debt is actually pending or otherwise constitutes a real pre-existing dispute. Since no such pending proceeding existed on the relevant date, the objection based on dispute did not survive. The Tribunal also noted that the conditions for admission under Section 9 were satisfied and that no disciplinary proceeding was pending against the proposed insolvency professional.
Conclusion: The Section 9 application was maintainable and the corporate debtor was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, with moratorium declared and an Interim Resolution Professional appointed.