The case involves an appeal against an order dated 5th September, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi, which rejected an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code). The appellant, an 'Operational Creditor', had preferred the application, which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. The main ground for rejection was that the notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code was not issued by the 'Operational Creditor' or its authorized representative but by an advocate. The respondent, the 'Corporate Debtor', argued that the application was incomplete and defective due to the absence of a statutory affidavit and the existence of a dispute. The Adjudicating Authority also
…M/s. J.P. Engineers Pvt. Ltd., the Appellant and an Operational Creditor, filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Indo Alusys Industries Ltd., the Respondent and Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi, rejected the application via an order dated 5th September, 2017, in Company Petition No.(IB)-203(ND)/2017. The primary reason for the rejection was that the notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code was issued by an advocate, Mr. Sharad Tyagi, on behalf of the Operational Creditor, rather than by the Operational Creditor itself or its authorized representative. The Respondent argued that the application was incomplete and defective due to the absence of a statutory
…Sign in to view the parties.
M/s. J.P. Engineers…
Respondent-‘Corporate Debtor’disputed the…
The case involves an appeal against an order dated 5th September, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi, which rejected an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code). The appellant, an 'Operational Creditor', had preferred the application, which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. The main ground for rejection was that the notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code was not issued by the 'Operational Creditor' or its authorized representative but by an advocate. The respondent, the 'Corporate Debtor', argued that the application was incomplete and defective due to the absence of a statutory affidavit and the existence of a dispute. The Adjudicating Authority also
…M/s. J.P. Engineers Pvt. Ltd., the Appellant and an Operational Creditor, filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Indo Alusys Industries Ltd., the Respondent and Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi, rejected the application via an order dated 5th September, 2017, in Company Petition No.(IB)-203(ND)/2017. The primary reason for the rejection was that the notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code was issued by an advocate, Mr. Sharad Tyagi, on behalf of the Operational Creditor, rather than by the Operational Creditor itself or its authorized representative. The Respondent argued that the application was incomplete and defective due to the absence of a statutory
…M/s. J.P. Engineers…
Respondent-‘Corporate Debtor’disputed the…