# In the matter of Mr. Bhaskar  Vs. M/s Sai Precious Traexim Pvt. Ltd and Anr. CA(AT)(Ins)No. 531 of 2020

> NCLAT judgment dated 2020-10-14. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLAT-00082. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the National Company…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 14 Oct 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLAT-00082
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-bhaskar-vs-ms-sai-precious-traexim-pvt-ltd-and-anr-ca-6194e8fc

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi Bench-VI, which admitted a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The appellant, one of the erstwhile directors of the Corporate Debtor, Pine View Portfolio Consultants Pvt. Ltd., filed the appeal. The appellant contended that the Corporate Debtor was never issued a notice by the Tribunal in the application filed by the first respondent. The appellant also argued that there was no debt extended by the first respondent to the Corporate Debtor and no privity of contract between them.

## Facts

Mr. Bhaskar, an erstwhile director of Pine View Portfolio Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (the 'Corporate Debtor'), filed an appeal against an order passed by the NCLT, New Delhi, admitting a Section 7 application filed by M/s Sai Precious Traexim Pvt. Ltd. (the 'Financial Creditor'). The NCLT order was dated 31.01.2020. The appellant argued that the Corporate Debtor was not served notice of the application. The appellant also contended that there was no direct debt between the Financial Creditor and the Corporate Debtor, and that a third party, Taj Consultancy, was involved in the financial transactions. The Financial Creditor claimed that Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, acting on behalf of the Corporate Debtor, had assured repayment of Rs. 25 Lakhs with interest. The Financial Creditor

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the Section 7 application without issuing …

**Ratio:** The principles of natural justice and the rules regarding service of notices and

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal reasoned that the failure to issue notice to the Corporate Debtor deprived

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 38 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, mandates that the

…

**Application:** In this case, the Appellant argued that the Corporate Debtor was never issued a

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Venugop…; V. P. S…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Bhas…
- **Respondents:** Pine View…; M/s Sai Precious…
- **Advocates:** Sushil Ag…

## Timeline

- **2019-12-06 — First Date of…**: No one was present on behalf of both…
- **2019-12-19 — Second Date of…**: No one from the ‘Financial Creditor' or 'Corporate Debtor' was present, and the ‘order'…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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-bhaskar-vs-ms-sai-precious-traexim-pvt-ltd-and-anr-ca-6194e8fc