The appeal was filed against the order dated 14.11.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court-II), which rejected the appellant's Section 9 application because the claim was less than the threshold prescribed under Section 4 of the IBC. The appellant claimed Rs.1,61,12,474.86, including interest.
Bhotika Trade & Services Pvt. Ltd. filed a Section 9 application claiming Rs. 1,61,12,474.86, including interest. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application because it considered the principal amount to be less than 1 crore, as there was no agreement regarding interest. The appellant argued that letters from the Corporate Debtor, Avinash EM Projects Pvt. Ltd., confirmed the debit balance, including interest. The letters dated 15.03.2017 and 20.02.2020 were presented as evidence. The respondent acknowledged the letters were issued in the normal course of business. The Adjudicating Authority's decision was based on the view that the interest could not be included in the claim without an agreement. The appellant relied on a previous judgment of the Tribunal
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Adjudicating Authority passed an order…
The Tribunal heard the…
The appeal was filed against the order dated 14.11.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court-II), which rejected the appellant's Section 9 application because the claim was less than the threshold prescribed under Section 4 of the IBC. The appellant claimed Rs.1,61,12,474.86, including interest.
Bhotika Trade & Services Pvt. Ltd. filed a Section 9 application claiming Rs. 1,61,12,474.86, including interest. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application because it considered the principal amount to be less than 1 crore, as there was no agreement regarding interest. The appellant argued that letters from the Corporate Debtor, Avinash EM Projects Pvt. Ltd., confirmed the debit balance, including interest. The letters dated 15.03.2017 and 20.02.2020 were presented as evidence. The respondent acknowledged the letters were issued in the normal course of business. The Adjudicating Authority's decision was based on the view that the interest could not be included in the claim without an agreement. The appellant relied on a previous judgment of the Tribunal
…The Adjudicating Authority passed an order…
The Tribunal heard the…