2025 (8) TMI 263 - SCH - IBC

SC upholds operational creditor's claim under Section 9 of IBC, dismisses appeal against insolvency process

The SC dismissed the appeal, affirming the NCLAT's decision upholding the operational creditor's claim under Section 9 of the IBC, 2016. The court found ... Withdrawal of appeal - Rejection of claims of the Operational Creditor on the basis that he did not get sufficient documentation - it was held by NCLAT that 'The Impugned Order merely recorded that an application filed under Section 12 A on the ground of purported settlement entered between the CoC and the sole Appellant herein who is Unsecured Financial Creditor who took a loan just before passing CIRP order is indigenous idea of Corporate Debtor and the Promoters of Corporate Debtor to bring out the Corporate Debtor from the clutches of CIRP which attained the finality through back door entry.' HELD THAT:- There are no good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgment, which records that the claim of respondent No. 1, Malharshanti Enterprises, as an operational creditor, was examined and upheld by the adjudicating authority while admitting the petition/application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. This order was upheld by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and, thereafter, the civil appeal preferred before this Court was dismissed as withdrawn. The present appeal is dismissed. The Supreme Court, with Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar presiding, dismissed the appeal concerning an attempt to 'set up a financial creditor.' The Court upheld the impugned judgment that recognized respondent Malharshanti Enterprises as an operational creditor under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. This finding was affirmed by the adjudicating authority and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. The Court noted no grounds to interfere and accordingly 'dismissed the appeal,' with delay condoned and pending applications disposed of.