Pre-existing dispute and prior commencement of arbitration bar a Section 9 insolvency application under the Insolvency Code.

A Section 9 insolvency application is not maintainable where a pre-existing dispute existed before the demand notice and arbitration had already commenced under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on receipt of the request to refer the dispute to arbitration. A prior notice invoking arbitration was enough to establish that the dispute relating to the debt was already in existence for purposes of Section 5(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, so the rejection of the insolvency application was upheld. A fresh factual plea that one agreement lacked an arbitration clause was not entertained because it had not been raised earlier and involved disputed facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the insolvency application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was liable to be rejected in view of a pre-existing dispute and the commencement of arbitration proceedings under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Analysis: The appeal arose from dismissal of an operational creditor's application under Section 9. The decisive question was whether arbitral proceedings had already commenced before the demand notice, since Section 5(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 treats a suit or arbitration relating to the existence of debt as a dispute. The record showed that a notice invoking arbitration had been issued before the demand notice, and under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arbitration commences on receipt of the request to refer the dispute to arbitration. The Tribunal also declined to entertain the new factual plea that one agreement lacked an arbitration clause, since that contention had not been raised earlier and involved disputed facts.

Conclusion: The rejection of the Section 9 application was upheld, as the dispute was already in existence and arbitration had commenced before the insolvency notice.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on the ground that the insolvency remedy could not be pursued when a prior arbitral dispute had already arisen, though liberty was reserved to seek appropriate relief on any agreement not containing an arbitration clause.

Ratio Decidendi: A Section 9 insolvency application cannot succeed where, before the demand notice, a dispute relating to the debt has already been referred to arbitration and arbitration is deemed to have commenced upon receipt of the request under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

---