# Mr. Keshav Kantamneni Vs. M/s. Kishan Chand Suresh Kumar & Ors,Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins)No.260 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-12-12. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00039. This case involves an appeal against the admission of an application under Section 9 of the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 12 Dec 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00039
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-keshav-kantamneni-vs-ms-kishan-chand-suresh-kumar-orscompany-appeal-10f61c34

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against the admission of an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Uniply Industries Limited. The Adjudicating Authority, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Division Bench – I, Chennai, admitted the application filed by Kishan Chand Suresh Kumar, the Operational Creditor, based on an operational debt. The Appellant, Keshav Kantamneni, the Ex Managing Director of Uniply Industries Limited, challenged the order, contending that the debt was based on a Memorandum of Compromise and not an operational debt, and that the Respondent had accepted delayed payments.

## Facts

Uniply Industries Limited, the Corporate Debtor, allegedly owed money to Kishan Chand Suresh Kumar, the Operational Creditor, for goods supplied. A Memorandum of Compromise was entered into between the parties, outlining a schedule of payments. The Appellant, Keshav Kantamneni, Ex Managing Director of Uniply Industries Limited, claimed to have made partial payments totaling Rs.3,20,00,000/- against an agreed debt sum of Rs.5,25,00,000/-, leaving an outstanding amount of Rs.2,05,00,000/-. The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice on 20.02.2020, alleging default. The Corporate Debtor was initially represented in proceedings but was later set ex-parte. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application under Section 9 of the IBC, leading to the appeal. The

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the debt claimed by the Operational Creditor qualifies as an 'operational debt' under the …

**Ratio:** An 'operational debt' includes a debt arising from the supply of goods or services. A

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal reasoned that the Memorandum of Compromise did not alter the fundamental

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'operational debt' under the IBC is broad and encompasses

…

**Application:** In this case, the debt originated from the supply of goods by the Operational

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. Venu…; KanthiNar…
- **Appellants:** Keshav Kant…
- **Respondents:** Uniply Industries…; M/s. Kishan Chand…
- **Advocates:** Akhil Bha…; Ajit Sh…; +1 more

## Timeline

- **2020-02-20 — Demand Notice…**: The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice to the Corporate Debtor under Section 8…
- **2021-10-04 — Impugned Orde…**: The Adjudicating Authority passed the 'impugned order' in IBA/751/2020, admitting the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

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-keshav-kantamneni-vs-ms-kishan-chand-suresh-kumar-orscompany-appeal-10f61c34