Corporate Insolvency Process Initiated with Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional

The application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was admitted, leading to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Respondent Corporate Debtor. An Interim Resolution Professional was appointed, and a moratorium was declared, imposing prohibitions on the Corporate Debtor, with specified exceptions. The Tribunal found default in payment by the Respondent, leading to the admission of the application and the subsequent legal proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.

---

---

Issues:
1. Application filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.
2. Dispute regarding the pending amount between the parties.
3. Allegations of incomplete, delayed, and underperformance leading to financial losses.
4. Claim of full and final settlement raised by the respondent.
5. Admission of the application and appointment of Interim Resolution Professional.
6. Declaration of moratorium and prohibitions imposed.

Analysis:

1. The application was filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Respondent Corporate Debtor. The Applicant, engaged in Consultancy Services for construction projects, claimed non-payment for services rendered.

2. A dispute arose regarding the pending amount between the parties. The Respondent claimed a full and final settlement was reached in 2015, and a no-claim declaration certificate was issued by the Applicant. However, the Applicant denied the settlement, alleging fabricated documents and unauthorized signatories.

3. The Respondent alleged incomplete, delayed, and underperformance by the Applicant, resulting in financial losses. The Respondent contended that the invoices were wrong, false, and time-barred, leading to termination of contracts and encashment of Performance Bank Guarantees.

4. The Respondent claimed a full and final settlement was reached in 2015, supported by documents and an affidavit. However, the Applicant refuted this claim, citing discrepancies in the documents and unauthorized signatories.

5. The Tribunal admitted the application after finding default in payment by the Respondent to the Applicant. An Interim Resolution Professional was appointed, and a public announcement was directed to be made regarding the admission of the application under Section 9 of the Code.

6. A moratorium was declared in accordance with Section 14 of the Code, imposing prohibitions on the Corporate Debtor, including suits, asset disposal, and recovery actions. Exceptions to the moratorium were specified, and the obligations of the Interim Resolution Professional and associated parties were outlined.

This detailed analysis covers the legal judgment comprehensively, addressing each issue involved in the case before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.

---