# In the matter of Mr. Umesh Saraf Vs. Tech India Engineers Pvt. Ltd. CA(AT)(Ins)No. 548 of 2020

> NCLAT judgment dated 2020-10-19. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLAT-00076. The appeal was filed by Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor, challenging the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 19 Oct 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLAT-00076
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-umesh-saraf-vs-tech-india-engineers-pvt-ltd-ca-6f1e59b6

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed by Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor, challenging the admission and initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against them. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application filed by Tech India Engineers Pvt. Ltd., the Operational Creditor, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The basis for admitting the application was that the Corporate Debtor had not raised any dispute by giving a suitable reply to the Demand Notice dated 11.04.2019 issued under Section 8(1) of IBC.

## Facts

Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) is in the business of Hotels, Tourism, and Travel Services, operating a luxury resort in Goa. They invited tenders for electrical works, which were assigned to Tech India Engineers Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor). An agreement was executed on 07.06.2016, and a Letter of Intent (LOI) dated 20.05.2016 specified payment terms and a 120-day completion timeline. The work was delayed, communicated by the Operational Creditor via email on 05.12.2017. The Corporate Debtor repeatedly reminded the Operational Creditor to complete the work, pointing out defects in emails dated 29.10.2016 and 24.02.2017. The Corporate Debtor assigned pending work to a third party, Yadav Electrical Work, due to the Operational Creditor's inability to

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether there was a pre-existing dispute between the Corporate Debtor and the Operational Creditor …

**Ratio:** The legal principle is that for an application under Section 9 of the IBC to be

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT reasoned that the earlier correspondence, specifically the e-mails exchanged

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'dispute' in the context of Section 8 and 9 of the IBC is

…

**Application:** The NCLAT applied the ratio to the facts by examining the e-mails dated

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Bansi Lal…; Anant Bijay…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Umesh S…
- **Respondents:** TRIUMPH REALTY…; TECH INDIA…

## Timeline

- **2016-06-07 — Agreement Ex…**: Agreement executed between Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd. and Tech India Engineers Pvt. Ltd.…
- **2016-05-20 — Letter of Inte…**: Letter of Intent issued, specifying payment…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 8 — Insolvency resolution by operational creditor](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-8)

---

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-umesh-saraf-vs-tech-india-engineers-pvt-ltd-ca-6f1e59b6