# In the mattter of Suresh Narayan Sing Vs. Tayo Rolls Limited Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 112 of 2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2018-09-26. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLAT-00103. The appeal was filed by Mr. Suresh Narayan Singh, representing 284 workers of Tayo Rolls…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 26 Sept 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLAT-00103
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/in-the-mattter-of-suresh-narayan-sing-vs-tayo-rolls-limited-company-appeal-1a1ec9e1

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed by Mr. Suresh Narayan Singh, representing 284 workers of Tayo Rolls Limited ('Corporate Debtor'), against an order dated January 3, 2018, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench. The Adjudicating Authority had rejected the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code) filed by the Appellant on the ground that such applications must be filed by the 'Operational Creditor' individually and not jointly. The Adjudicating Authority also noted the impracticality of multiple 'Operational Creditors' filing a joint petition, as they would need to issue individual claim notices under Section 8 of the I&B Code.

## Facts

Mr. Suresh Narayan Singh, representing 284 workers of Tayo Rolls Limited ('Corporate Debtor'), filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench. The application was for unpaid wages from October 2016 to October 2017. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application, stating that it should have been filed individually by each 'Operational Creditor' and not jointly. The Appellant argued that the application was preferred by the Authorised Representative of the workers. The Respondent, Tayo Rolls Limited, stated they had no objection to the application and had also filed an application under Section 10 of the I&B Code, which was dismissed.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was correct in rejecting the application under Section 9 of the …

**Ratio:** The ratio is that the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the application on a

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Adjudicating Authority should have considered the substance

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the I&B Code should be interpreted to promote

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning apply to the specific facts because the Adjudicating

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Suresh Narayan…
- **Respondents:** Tayo Rolls…

## Timeline

- **2018-01-03 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench, passed an…
- **2018-09-26 — Order by Appellate…**: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi, set aside the order of…

## 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/in-the-mattter-of-suresh-narayan-sing-vs-tayo-rolls-limited-company-appeal-1a1ec9e1