https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297414 The application under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was dismissed due to the existence of a genuine dispute between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor regarding non-payment for the transfer/sale of licenses. Despite attempts to serve notice on the Respondent, the notices were returned unserved. The Adjudicating Authority highlighted a pre-existing dispute between the parties, leading to the dismissal of the application based on the principles outlined in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. vs. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd., emphasizing the importance of distinguishing genuine disputes from baseless claims. en-us Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Sep 2021 22:51:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297414 The application under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was dismissed due to the existence of a genuine dispute between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor regarding non-payment for the transfer/sale of licenses. Despite attempts to serve notice on the Respondent, the notices were returned unserved. The Adjudicating Authority highlighted a pre-existing dispute between the parties, leading to the dismissal of the application based on the principles outlined in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. vs. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd., emphasizing the importance of distinguishing genuine disputes from baseless claims. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297414