Operational Creditor's Application Dismissed Due to Lack of Evidence in Construction Debt Dispute

The Tribunal dismissed the Operational Creditor's application under Section 9 of the IBC for initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor due to insufficient evidence supporting the claim for outstanding invoices. Disputes arose over non-payment of operational debt related to construction work, with the Corporate Debtor alleging fabrication of invoices and completion issues. Despite the Operational Creditor's contentions, the Tribunal found the evidence provided inadequate to establish the validity of the invoices or work completion, resulting in the application's dismissal.

---

---

Issues:
- Application under Section 9 of IBC for initiation of CIRP against Corporate Debtor
- Non-payment of operational debt by Corporate Debtor
- Dispute over unpaid invoices and work completion

Analysis:
1. The Operational Creditor filed an application under Section 9 of the IBC, claiming non-payment of operational debt by the Corporate Debtor amounting to Rs. 44,65,745.68. The dispute arose from a work order executed between the parties for construction work, where the Corporate Debtor allegedly failed to pay for the electrical work subcontracted by the Operational Creditor.

2. The Operational Creditor raised six invoices, but the Corporate Debtor only paid for four, leaving a balance of Rs. 44,65,745.68 on the last two invoices. Despite demands, the Corporate Debtor did not fulfill the payment obligations as per the work order terms.

3. The Corporate Debtor argued that the Operational Creditor failed to submit claims during the CIRP proceedings initiated earlier, and the approved Resolution Plan binds all stakeholders. However, the Operational Creditor contended that the invoices in question were raised within the stipulated time frame.

4. The Corporate Debtor disputed the authenticity of the invoices, claiming they were fabricated and mentioned GST numbers before registration. Additionally, they asserted that full payment was made, and the contract ended due to the Operational Creditor's failure to complete the project by the specified date.

5. The Corporate Debtor raised disputes regarding debt amount, service quality, and terminated the work order, mentioning ongoing arbitration proceedings. The Operational Creditor based their claim on the remaining unpaid invoices, challenging the Corporate Debtor's assertions.

6. The Tribunal noted the lack of substantial evidence supporting the Operational Creditor's claim for the outstanding invoices. The documents provided did not conclusively prove the completion of work or the validity of the invoices, leading to the dismissal of the application under Section 9 of the IBC.

---