https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282862 Pendency of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 does not, by itself, constitute a pre-existing dispute for resisting an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. A pre-existing dispute must exist before receipt of the demand notice, and mere recovery or cheque-dishonour proceedings are insufficient to show such a dispute. On the facts, the pending Section 138 proceedings were treated as an admission of debt rather than evidence of a real dispute, so the operational creditor's application remained maintainable and the appeal failed. en-us Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:19:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282862 Pendency of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 does not, by itself, constitute a pre-existing dispute for resisting an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. A pre-existing dispute must exist before receipt of the demand notice, and mere recovery or cheque-dishonour proceedings are insufficient to show such a dispute. On the facts, the pending Section 138 proceedings were treated as an admission of debt rather than evidence of a real dispute, so the operational creditor's application remained maintainable and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282862