Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1805 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL — NEW DELHI BENCHMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - non-compliance with mandate of section 8 of the I and B Code - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT:- Proof of existence of a debt and a default in relation to such debt can be proved by documentary evidence as contemplated by section 9(3)(d) of the I and B Code. Section 8 does not prescribe any particular method of proof of occurrence of default - In the instant case it has been noticed by the Adjudicating Authority that the operational creditor had submitted a letter dated September 11, 2017 from ICICI Bank confirming that no amount had been received in the account of the operational creditor from any account of the corporate debtor since July 7, 2016. The existence of debt and default were satisfactorily established by the operational creditor. No pre-existing dispute was brought to the notice of the Adjudicating Authority to reject the application. Assuming that there was a defect in the demand notice, the Adjudicating Authority was required to provide opportunity to the operational creditor to remove the same. The Adjudicating Authority appears to have overlooked the legal aspects. It also appears that the appellant had sent another demand notice which was received back as "refused". This is claimed to have been filed as an annexure with Form 5 filed by the operational creditor before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority appears to have ignored the same, for no valid reason. The case is remitted back to the Adjudicating Authority to admit the application in terms of provisions of section 9(5)(i) - appeal allowed by wya of remand.
|