# In the matter of Adish Jain s-o Mohinder Jain Shareholder of J.P. Engineers Pvt. Ltd Vs. Sumit Bansal and Anr. CA (AT) (Insolvency) No. 379 of 2020
& I.A. No. 1509 of 2020

> NCLAT judgment dated 2020-08-10. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLAT-00172. This is an appeal against the order dated 26th February 2019 passed by the National Company…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 10 Aug 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLAT-00172
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/adish-jain-s-o-mohinder-jain-shareholder-of-jp-engineers-pvt-ltd-vs-sumit-bansal-ca7b73f7

## Summary

### Background

This is an appeal against the order dated 26th February 2019 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi, which admitted a Section 9 application filed by Worldwide Metals Pvt. Ltd., the Operational Creditor, against J.P. Engineers Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The appeal was filed by a shareholder of the Corporate Debtor, Adish Jain, under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

## Facts

The Corporate Debtor, J.P. Engineers Pvt. Ltd., was a regular buyer of Aluminium Ingots and Wire Rods from the Operational Creditor, Worldwide Metals Pvt. Ltd. The Operational Creditor claimed that the Corporate Debtor owed Rs. 16,18,18,265/- for purchases made between 06.12.2017 and 16.04.2018. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application under Section 9 of the IBC. The Corporate Debtor claimed a pre-existing dispute, citing a reply dated 28.08.2018 stating that accounts were reconciled. The Corporate Debtor also presented confirmatory letters and journal entries. The Operational Creditor disputed the authenticity of these documents, alleging forgery and fabrication. The Operational Creditor also argued that the Corporate Debtor had made payments to sister

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the Section 9 application filed by the …

**Ratio:** The existence of a pre-existing dispute is a bar to the admission of a Section 9

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted the requirement of a pre-existing dispute to mean that

…

**Application:** The NCLAT found that the Appellant did not raise any plausible contention

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** A.I.S. C…; Anant Bijay…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Adish…
- **Respondents:** J.P. Engineers…; Sumit B…

## Timeline

- **2019-02-26 — Order by…**: Order passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, admitting the Section 9…
- **2018-08-17 — Operational Creditor…**: Operational Creditor issued a…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/adish-jain-s-o-mohinder-jain-shareholder-of-jp-engineers-pvt-ltd-vs-sumit-bansal-ca7b73f7