Insolvency Application Rejected: Emphasizes Compliance with Statutory Requirements

The Tribunal rejected the application for initiating corporate insolvency resolution against the debtor due to non-compliance with statutory requirements under Sec.8 and Sec.9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of complying with these sections, the judgment highlighted the necessity of issuing demand notices and submitting required documents. The rejection did not preclude the petitioner from seeking the claimed amount through alternative legal avenues, underscoring the importance of adherence to procedural prerequisites for commencing the insolvency resolution process.

---

---

Issues involved:
Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process under Sec.9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 without compliance of statutory requirements.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Application under Sec.9 of I & B Code: The Applicant filed an application under Sec.9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for the initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process against the corporate debtor, citing an amount due of &8377; 77,00,000 based on a purchase order and default in supply of goods.

2. Non-Compliance with Notice Requirement: The corporate debtor contended that the application was not maintainable as it was not preceded by a notice in Form 4 as required by the Adjudicating Authority Rules, 2016. The absence of a notice in Form 3 or 4 before filing the petition under the I & B Code was highlighted, emphasizing the importance of strict compliance with Sec. 8 of the Code.

3. Mandatory Compliance with Sec.8 and Sec.9: The judgment emphasized the mandatory nature of complying with Sec.8 and Sec.9 of the I & B Code. It was noted that the petition was filed without issuing the demand notice as prescribed, and the application did not include the necessary documents such as an affidavit regarding the absence of a dispute notice and a certificate from financial institutions confirming non-payment of debt.

4. NCLAT Precedent: Referring to a specific NCLAT case (Company Appeal 39 of 2017), the judgment reiterated the requirements under Sec.9, including the furnishing of specific documents along with the application. The judgment highlighted the mandatory nature of these requirements, emphasizing the word "shall" in sub-section (3) of Sec.9.

5. Rejection of Application: Due to the non-compliance with the statutory requirements of Sec.8 and Sec.9, the Tribunal rejected the application for initiating the corporate resolution process against the debtor. The order clarified that this rejection did not affect the petitioner's right to pursue the claimed amount through other legal provisions.

In conclusion, the judgment focused on the importance of strict compliance with the statutory provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, particularly regarding the issuance of demand notices, submission of required documents, and adherence to procedural requirements. The rejection of the application underscored the significance of meeting these prerequisites for initiating the corporate insolvency resolution process.

---