# In the matter of Annapurna Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. SORIL Infra Resources Ltd. CA (AT) No. 32-2017

> NCLAT judgment dated 2017-08-29. Citation: TCN-2017-NCLAT-00127. The case involves an appeal against an order dated March 24, 2017, passed by the National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 29 Aug 2017
- **Citation:** TCN-2017-NCLAT-00127
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/annapurna-infrastructure-pvt-ltd-and-anr-vs-soril-infra-resources-ltd-ca-6f2885c7

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated March 24, 2017, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, which rejected an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the 'Corporate Debtor'. The NCLT rejected the application on the ground that a dispute existed between the parties pending adjudication. The dispute arose from a lease deed where the appellant rented premises to the respondent, who failed to pay rent, leading to arbitration. The arbitrator passed an award in favor of the appellants, which the respondent challenged. The challenge was dismissed, and the appellants issued a demand notice under

…

## Facts

M/s. Annapurna Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (the appellant) rented premises to M/s. SORIL Infra Resources Ltd. (the respondent/corporate debtor) under a lease deed dated November 23, 2005. The respondent failed to pay rent, leading the appellants to invoke the arbitration clause. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi appointed Justice (Dr.) Mukundakam Sharma (Retired) as the Sole Arbitrator. The Arbitrator passed an award on September 9, 2016, in favor of the appellants, granting Rs.2,67,52,283/- for rent from 1.4.2008 to 22.3.2010, Rs. 1,11,56,145/- for damages equivalent to rent for six months from 22.3.2010, and future interest at 12% per annum. The respondent challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, but the application was

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether there is an 'existence of dispute' between the parties, the award passed by Arbitral …

**Ratio:** The pendency of an arbitration proceeding has been termed as an 'existence of dispute'

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT referred to Section 5(6) of the I&B Code, which defines 'dispute' to

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'existence of dispute' under the I&B Code is crucial

…

**Application:** In this case, the NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority erred in

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Balvinder…
- **Appellants:** M/s. Annapurna…
- **Respondents:** M/s. SORIL Infra…

## Timeline

- **2005-11-23 — Lease De…**: Lease deed executed between Annapurna…
- **2016-09-09 — Arbitral…**: Arbitrator passed an award in…

## 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/annapurna-infrastructure-pvt-ltd-and-anr-vs-soril-infra-resources-ltd-ca-6f2885c7