SC upholds dismissal of Section 9 application due to default within Section 10A period, denies amendment of default datesThe SC upheld the NCLAT's dismissal of the Section 9 application filed by the Operational Creditor, finding it non-maintainable due to the date of default occurring within the Section 10A period. The Adjudicating Authority's refusal to amend the dates of default was affirmed. The court found no grounds to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the civil appeal.

The Supreme Court, through Hon'ble Justices J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, after hearing Senior Counsel Mr. R. P. Bhatt and reviewing the record, declined to interfere with the impugned order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The Court held: "no good reason to interfere" and accordingly dismissed the Civil Appeal. The Court noted that the appellant remains free to pursue "any other legal remedy... in accordance with law." Pending applications were also disposed of.

Dismissal of Section 9 application filed by the Operational Creditor - pre-existing dispute - date of default fell within the Section 10A period - it was held by NCLAT that Section 9 application is non-maintainable due to the dates of default falling within the Section 10A period.The Adjudicating Authority correctly dismissed the application without amending the dates of default. HELD THAT:- There are no good reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The Civil Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. ROYAL CONSTRUCTION Versus GANNON DUNKERLEY AND COMPANY LIMITED
IBC
2025 (7) TMI 1827 - SC Order - TMI
SUPREME COURT - SC
Dated:- 15-7-2025
Civil Appeal No. 7659/2025 - -
Insolvency & Bankruptcy
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. B. PARDIWALA And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN For the Appellant : Mr. R. P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv. Mr. S Sukumaran, Adv. Mr. Yashvardhan, Adv. Mr. Anand Sukumar, AOR Mr. Bhupesh Pathak, Adv. Mrs. Ruche Anand, Adv ORDER 1. Having heard Mr. R.P. Bhatt, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant and having gone through the materials on record, we find no good reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. 2. The Civil Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. 3. However, if there is any other legal remedy available to the appellant, it is always open for it to avail such remedy in accordance with law. 4. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders