Operational insolvency application admitted after valid notice, no pre-existing dispute, limitation compliance, and proved default.

An operational insolvency application was found maintainable where the demand notice was served at the corporate debtor's registered office, which was treated as sufficient service. No pre-existing dispute was shown because the debtor raised no dispute notice and only expressed inability to pay after service. The petition was within limitation as the invoices were from 2018 and the filing was in 2019. The application was complete, supported by the statutory affidavit, invoices and ledger, and admitted non-payment established default; insolvency proceedings were therefore commenced with moratorium and appointment of an interim resolution professional.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the demand notice in Form 3 was duly served on the corporate debtor; (ii) whether there was any pre-existing dispute regarding the operational debt; (iii) whether the petition was within limitation; and (iv) whether the operational creditor had established a complete application and default so as to warrant admission under the insolvency law.

Issue (i): whether the demand notice in Form 3 was duly served on the corporate debtor.

Analysis: The notice was sent to the registered office reflected in the master data, and the postal receipt together with the tracking report showed service at that address. Service at the registered address was treated as sufficient compliance.

Conclusion: The demand notice was duly served.

Issue (ii): whether there was any pre-existing dispute regarding the operational debt.

Analysis: The operational creditor placed invoices and the demand notice on record. After service of notice, the corporate debtor sent an e-mail expressing inability to pay the dues, but no notice of dispute was raised. On that material, no pre-existing dispute was found.

Conclusion: No pre-existing dispute existed.

Issue (iii): whether the petition was within limitation.

Analysis: The invoices related to 2018 and the petition was filed in 2019. On that chronology, the claim was held to be within the limitation period.

Conclusion: The petition was within limitation.

Issue (iv): whether the operational creditor had established a complete application and default so as to warrant admission under the insolvency law.

Analysis: The application was found complete, the statutory affidavit under Section 9(3)(b) was on record, the ledger and invoices supported the outstanding operational debt, and the admitted non-payment established default above the threshold. The statutory conditions for admission were satisfied, and moratorium and appointment of an interim resolution professional followed as consequential steps.

Conclusion: The application was admitted and insolvency proceedings were initiated against the corporate debtor.

Final Conclusion: The operational creditor succeeded in establishing service, absence of dispute, limitation, and default, resulting in commencement of the corporate insolvency resolution process with moratorium and appointment of an interim resolution professional.

Ratio Decidendi: An operational insolvency application is liable to be admitted where the demand notice is duly served, no pre-existing dispute is shown, the claim is within limitation, and default in payment of an operational debt is established by complete documentary support.

---