Dismissal of Insolvency Petition: Failure to Prove Notice Delivery

The Tribunal dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the Applicant failed to establish proper delivery of the Demand Notice, a prerequisite for initiating insolvency proceedings. The Applicant, seeking resolution for unpaid salary and consultation fee, could not prove delivery to the Respondent's registered address, leading to the application's dismissal solely on this ground. The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with procedural requirements and adhering to statutory procedures in insolvency matters to ensure fairness and due process for all parties involved.

---

---

Issues:
- Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 based on inability to liquidate operational debt.
- Dispute over non-payment of salary and consultation fee by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant.
- Contention regarding termination of the Applicant's services due to alleged non-performance during the probation period.
- Examination of the delivery of the Demand Notice as a prerequisite for filing an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Analysis:
1. The Applicant filed a petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process due to the Corporate Debtor's failure to pay operational debt. The Applicant, an ex-employee, claimed unpaid salary and consultation fee totaling Rs. 3,35,916. The Respondent disputed the claim, citing the Applicant's termination for alleged non-performance during the probation period, leading to company losses.

2. The Applicant provided evidence of salary payment until August 2018, with outstanding dues thereafter. Additionally, the Applicant claimed a commission as per an unpaid invoice from February 2019. The Respondent argued that the Applicant's termination was justified due to unsatisfactory performance, resulting in company losses. The Respondent contended that the termination was in accordance with the terms of the appointment letter.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the delivery of the Demand Notice, a prerequisite under Section 8(1) of the IBC, 2016, before filing an application under Section 9. The Applicant submitted postal receipts and delivery details, but the tracking report indicated non-delivery to the Respondent's registered address. Due to the failure to establish proper delivery of the Demand Notice, the Tribunal deemed the application not maintainable and dismissed it on this ground alone.

4. The judgment highlighted the importance of complying with procedural requirements, such as delivering the Demand Notice, before initiating insolvency proceedings. The dismissal of the application emphasized the significance of adhering to statutory procedures to maintain the integrity and validity of insolvency petitions under the IBC, 2016. The decision underscored the need for strict adherence to procedural norms in insolvency matters to ensure fairness and due process for all parties involved.

---