Operational debt through a del credere agent can support Section 9 insolvency action where the commercial arrangement places risk on the agent.

A del credere agent who, under the commercial arrangement, bore responsibility for collection, buyer default and remittance of sale proceeds was treated as the person to whom the operational debt was owed, so the agent could maintain a Section 9 insolvency application. Objections based on invoices standing in the supplier's name, missing GST documentation in the agent's name, and express authority to sue on behalf of the principal did not override the contractual and commercial reality of the tripartite arrangement. On the contempt issue, the resolution professional's conduct during CIRP was found to be consistent with the evolving tribunal directions and not shown to be wilful disobedience, so no contempt was made out.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the debt claimed by the del credere agent constituted an operational debt and whether the agent was an operational creditor entitled to maintain an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; (ii) whether the alleged non-compliance with the interim and later directions warranted a finding of contempt against the resolution professional.

Issue (i): Whether the debt claimed by the del credere agent constituted an operational debt and whether the agent was an operational creditor entitled to maintain an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Analysis: The arrangement showed that the corporate debtor had requested registration through the del credere agent, had dealt with the agent for a substantial period, and had made payments to the agent without objection. The agreement placed collection responsibility, financial exposure for buyer default, and liability to remit sale proceeds on the agent, with the agent bearing the risk of non-payment. On that basis, the debt recoverable by the agent was treated as one arising from the supply transactions and as a debt legally assignable to the agent within the statutory definition. The objections based on invoices standing in the supplier's name, absence of GST returns and e-way bills in the agent's name, and lack of express authority to file proceedings on behalf of the principal did not displace the contractual and commercial reality of the tripartite arrangement.

Conclusion: The debt was held to be an operational debt and the agent was held entitled to maintain the Section 9 proceeding.

Issue (ii): Whether the alleged non-compliance with the interim and later directions warranted a finding of contempt against the resolution professional

Analysis: The record showed a continuing dispute regarding possession and operation of the factory premises during the CIRP. The resolution professional acted pursuant to the admission order, the interim status of the proceedings, and subsequent developments, while the later directions of the Tribunal allowed the appellant to run the factory with reporting safeguards. In that setting, the conduct complained of was found to be supported by the evolving orders and was not shown to amount to wilful disobedience.

Conclusion: No contempt was found against the resolution professional.

Final Conclusion: The admission of the insolvency petition was upheld and the contempt proceedings failed, with no interference made in the impugned order or the connected directions.

Ratio Decidendi: A del credere agent who, under the governing commercial arrangement, bears contractual responsibility for collection and buyer default may be treated as the person to whom the operational debt is owed and may maintain a Section 9 proceeding on that basis.

---