Tribunal Admits Creditor's Application Under Insolvency Code

The Tribunal admitted the Operational Creditor's application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, due to the Corporate Debtor's failure to pay operational dues, totaling Rs. 9,34,767.00 with interest. Despite evidence of default and lack of response from the Corporate Debtor, the Tribunal initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, appointing an Insolvency Resolution Professional and imposing a moratorium to manage the debtor's affairs and protect assets during the resolution process.

---

---

Issues Involved:
- Application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 seeking payment of operational dues.
- Failure of the Corporate Debtor to pay outstanding dues.
- Proof of default and lack of response from the Corporate Debtor.
- Admittance of the application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
- Appointment of an Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) and initiation of moratorium.

Issue 1: Application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 seeking payment of operational dues.

The Tribunal considered a Company Application filed by the Operational Creditor seeking various reliefs, including directing the Corporate Debtor to pay operational dues amounting to Rs. 9,34,767.00 with interest. The Operational Creditor, a supplier of steel, alleged non-payment by the Corporate Debtor for supplied alloy casting. The Operational Creditor served a demand notice under the Code, which remained unanswered by the Corporate Debtor, leading to the application for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

Issue 2: Failure of the Corporate Debtor to pay outstanding dues.

The Tribunal noted that the Corporate Debtor failed to pay the invoiced amount by the due date, resulting in a total due of Rs. 9,34,767.00 along with interest. Despite the demand notice served by the Operational Creditor, the Corporate Debtor did not respond or make any payments, indicating a clear default on their part.

Issue 3: Proof of default and lack of response from the Corporate Debtor.

The Tribunal observed that the Operational Creditor provided evidence of default and fulfilled all requirements under the IB Code, 2016. The Corporate Debtor did not reply to the demand notice or participate in subsequent proceedings, despite multiple opportunities and notices. The lack of any dispute or payment proof from the Corporate Debtor further strengthened the case of default against them.

Issue 4: Admittance of the application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

After thorough examination, the Tribunal found the Operational Creditor's case to be substantiated, leading to the admission of the application for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Tribunal ordered the commencement of CIRP, appointing an IRP to manage the Corporate Debtor's affairs and declared a moratorium to protect the assets and interests during the resolution process.

Issue 5: Appointment of an Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) and initiation of moratorium.

The Tribunal appointed an IRP and directed them to take immediate charge of the Corporate Debtor's management. Additionally, the IRP was instructed to make a public announcement, call for claim submissions, and comply with various provisions of the IB Code, 2016. The Tribunal imposed a moratorium, prohibiting actions against the Corporate Debtor's assets and ensuring continuity of essential services during the resolution process.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal aspects and decisions made by the Tribunal regarding the application for insolvency and the subsequent resolution process initiated against the Corporate Debtor.

---