# In the matter of Debarata Ray Choudhuri vs. The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-03-05. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00185. The case involves an appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order that dismissed an…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 5 Mar 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00185
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/debarata-ray-choudhuri-vs-the-state-trading-corporation-of-india-ltd-5b56a22d

## Summary

### Background

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.

## Facts

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

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether a pre-existing dispute existed between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor …

**Ratio:** Section 8(2)(a) of the IBC, 2016, stipulates that a Corporate Debtor must, within ten

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Respondent had raised concerns regarding the accuracy of the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'pre-existing dispute' under Section 8 of the IBC

…

**Application:** In this case, the court found that the Respondent had raised valid objections

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Arun Ba…
- **Appellants:** Debarata Ray…
- **Respondents:** The State Trading…

## Timeline

- **2006-01-01 — Engagement of…**: The Respondent engaged the Appellant's services for recovering amounts and handling legal…
- **2017-02-07 — Respondent'…**: The Respondent acknowledged the bills submitted by the Appellant but raised concerns…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

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/debarata-ray-choudhuri-vs-the-state-trading-corporation-of-india-ltd-5b56a22d