# In the matter of M/s. G.L. Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Supreme Engineering Ltd.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-03-02. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00603. This case involves an appeal against an order dated 06th May, 2021, passed by the National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 2 Mar 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00603
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ms-gl-engineering-industries-pvt-ltd-vs-supreme-engineering-ltd-a0c987f3

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against an order dated 06th May, 2021, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench, Court-V, in C.P. (IB) 424/MB/2020. The NCLT had dismissed an application filed by the Appellant under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Appellant, M/s. G.L. Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd., claimed that the Respondent, Supreme Engineering Ltd., owed them an operational debt. The NCLT dismissed the application, stating that the Appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence of any services rendered or amounts 'due and payable'.

## Facts

M/s. G.L. Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) claimed that Supreme Engineering Ltd. (Respondent) owed them an operational debt. The Appellant supplied steel material to the Respondent since October 2013. Payments were made according to mutually agreed terms, including delayed payment charges. The last sale invoice was dated 23/01/2018 for Rs.3,26,45,901.32/-, and the Respondent made a payment of Rs.1 Crore in January 2019. The Respondent issued several cheques between 13/02/2018 and 24/11/2018 but requested the Appellant not to deposit them. Later, fresh cheques were issued. A letter dated 15/05/2019 confirmed a liability of Rs.4 Crores, conditional on delayed deposit. A cheque dated 16/05/2019 for Rs.4 Crores was issued. A letter dated 30/05/2019 confirmed a

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Appellant has filed sufficient documents to establish whether the amounts claimed in …

**Ratio:** The ratio is that an operational debt must be established with sufficient evidence,

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'operational debt' under Section 5(21) of the IBC

…

**Application:** In this case, the Appellant's claim failed because they could not provide

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Anant Bijay…; Shreesha…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** M/s. G.L.…
- **Respondents:** Supreme Engineerin…

## Timeline

- **2013-10-01 — Supply of Steel…**: Appellant started supplying…
- **2018-01-23 — Last Sale I…**: Last sale invoice issued…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 5(20) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-5)

---

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/ms-gl-engineering-industries-pvt-ltd-vs-supreme-engineering-ltd-a0c987f3