The case involves an appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order that dismissed an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. The appellant, Debarata Ray Choudhuri, a senior advocate, claimed a default in payment of professional fees. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application based on the existence of a pre-existing dispute.
Debarata Ray Choudhuri, a senior advocate, filed an application for initiating CIRP against The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. for non-payment of professional fees amounting to Rs 6,26,90,985. The fees comprised a principal sum of Rs 3,93,55,110 and an interest component of Rs 2,33,35,875. The appellant claimed that the respondent engaged his services since 2006 for recovering amounts and handling legal proceedings. The respondent allegedly issued multiple fee schedules, and the appellant applied special fees for high-stakes matters. The appellant sent letters highlighting non-payment issues from 2009 onwards. The respondent acknowledged the bills in an email dated 07.02.2017 but raised concerns about missing order sheets for some bills. The appellant issued a
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Respondent engaged the Appellant's services…
The Respondent acknowledged the bills…
The case involves an appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order that dismissed an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. The appellant, Debarata Ray Choudhuri, a senior advocate, claimed a default in payment of professional fees. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application based on the existence of a pre-existing dispute.
Debarata Ray Choudhuri, a senior advocate, filed an application for initiating CIRP against The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. for non-payment of professional fees amounting to Rs 6,26,90,985. The fees comprised a principal sum of Rs 3,93,55,110 and an interest component of Rs 2,33,35,875. The appellant claimed that the respondent engaged his services since 2006 for recovering amounts and handling legal proceedings. The respondent allegedly issued multiple fee schedules, and the appellant applied special fees for high-stakes matters. The appellant sent letters highlighting non-payment issues from 2009 onwards. The respondent acknowledged the bills in an email dated 07.02.2017 but raised concerns about missing order sheets for some bills. The appellant issued a
…The Respondent engaged the Appellant's services…
The Respondent acknowledged the bills…