# In the matter of In Style Fashion vs. Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-01-09. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00697. The appeal was filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by In…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 9 Jan 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00697
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/in-style-fashion-vs-aditya-birla-fashion-and-retail-limited-73b49738

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by In Style Fashion, the Operational Creditor, against an order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench - VI) in CP (IB) No.4099/MB/VI/2019. The Adjudicating Authority had rejected the Section 9 application filed by the Operational Creditor seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The Operational Creditor claimed to be a franchisee and commission agent for the Corporate Debtor, with showrooms opened under Agency Agreements dated 08.07.2011 and 20.12.2011. The showrooms closed on 02.02.2016, and the Operational Creditor claimed

…

## Facts

In Style Fashion, the Operational Creditor, sought to initiate CIRP against Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited, the Corporate Debtor, based on outstanding operational debt. The Operational Creditor acted as a franchisee and commission agent for the Corporate Debtor, operating showrooms under Agency Agreements dated 08.07.2011 and 20.12.2011. The showrooms closed on 02.02.2016. The Operational Creditor claimed outstanding commission and invoices for salvageable and non-salvageable assets. The Corporate Debtor made a part payment of Rs.51,283.28 on 28.04.2017. A Section 8 demand notice was sent on 07.08.2019, claiming Rs. 1.05 crore. The Operational Creditor filed a Section 9 application, which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority on the grounds of limitation

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Section 9 application filed by the …

**Ratio:** The limitation period for filing a Section 9 application is three years from the date of

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT disagreed with the Adjudicating Authority's finding that the application was

…

**Interpretation:** The limitation period starts from the date of default, but a part-payment can

…

**Application:** In this case, the NCLAT found that the Operational Creditor had rectified the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** In Style F…
- **Respondents:** Aditya Birla…
- **Advocates:** Sanyam…; Deepak…; +6 more

## Timeline

- **2011-07-08 — Agency Agr…**: Agency Agreement (Planet Fashion Agreement) was signed between the Operational Creditor…
- **2011-12-20 — Agency Agr…**: Agency Agreement (Allen Solly Agreement) was signed between the Operational Creditor and…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 8 — Insolvency resolution by operational creditor](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-8)

---

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/in-style-fashion-vs-aditya-birla-fashion-and-retail-limited-73b49738