# In the matter of Mr. Ashwini Kumar Prabhakar Vs. Hero Steels Ltd. & Anr. CA (AT) No. 138-2017

> NCLAT judgment dated 2017-11-06. Citation: TCN-2017-NCLAT-00081. This is a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 138 of 2017. The appeal was filed by the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Nov 2017
- **Citation:** TCN-2017-NCLAT-00081
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-ashwini-kumar-prabhakar-vs-hero-steels-ltd-anr-ca-98ac294d

## Summary

### Background

This is a Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 138 of 2017. The appeal was filed by the appellant, a Director/Shareholder, against the order dated July 13, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in CP(IB) No. 37/Chd/Pb/2017. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application preferred by the respondent, an Operational Creditor, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. A moratorium was declared, and an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was invited.

## Facts

Mr. Ashwini Kumar Prabhakar, the appellant, filed an appeal against the order dated July 13, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in CP(IB) No. 37/Chd/Pb/2017. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application preferred by the respondent, Hero Steels Ltd., an Operational Creditor, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The appellant argued that the demand notice under sub-Section (1) of Section 8 was not issued in accordance with the law and that the demand notice/invoices were not properly filled up. The respondent submitted that Form 3 was properly filled up, showing the total amount of Rs.2,49,27,324 towards unpaid

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the demand notice under sub-Section (1) of Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, …

**Ratio:** The legal principle is that a demand notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the respondent had appeared and enclosed the copy of the notice

…

**Interpretation:** Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires a demand notice to be

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts by examining the demand notice and

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Ashwini Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Hero Steel…

## Timeline

- **2017-07-13 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh…
- **2017-11-06 — Appeal Pre…**: The appellant, Mr. Ashwini Kumar Prabhakar, preferred an appeal against the order dated…

## 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/mr-ashwini-kumar-prabhakar-vs-hero-steels-ltd-anr-ca-98ac294d