The case involves an appeal against the admission of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench, admitted the application against the Corporate Debtor, M/s Satkar Container Lines Pvt. Ltd., based on an application by an Operational Creditor. The order included a moratorium and appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional. The appellant, Amanpreet Singh Bawa, Director and Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor, challenged the order, arguing lack of service of notice and the existence of a dispute regarding the invoice.
The Corporate Debtor, M/s Satkar Container Lines Pvt. Ltd., availed services from the Operational Creditor for storage and handling of containers in 2017-18. The Operational Creditor raised invoices, and after adjusting the security deposit, demanded Rs. 24,91,063/- as outstanding dues. The Corporate Debtor failed to clear the dues despite a demand notice. The Operational Creditor filed an application under Section 9 of the I&B Code before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application ex-parte on October 10, 2018, as the Corporate Debtor did not appear in response to the notice. The Appellant, Director and Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor, filed an appeal, arguing that the Corporate Debtor was not properly served with notice and
…Sign in to view the parties.
Corporate Debtor availed services from…
Adjudicating Authority…
The case involves an appeal against the admission of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench, admitted the application against the Corporate Debtor, M/s Satkar Container Lines Pvt. Ltd., based on an application by an Operational Creditor. The order included a moratorium and appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional. The appellant, Amanpreet Singh Bawa, Director and Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor, challenged the order, arguing lack of service of notice and the existence of a dispute regarding the invoice.
The Corporate Debtor, M/s Satkar Container Lines Pvt. Ltd., availed services from the Operational Creditor for storage and handling of containers in 2017-18. The Operational Creditor raised invoices, and after adjusting the security deposit, demanded Rs. 24,91,063/- as outstanding dues. The Corporate Debtor failed to clear the dues despite a demand notice. The Operational Creditor filed an application under Section 9 of the I&B Code before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application ex-parte on October 10, 2018, as the Corporate Debtor did not appear in response to the notice. The Appellant, Director and Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor, filed an appeal, arguing that the Corporate Debtor was not properly served with notice and
…Corporate Debtor availed services from…
Adjudicating Authority…