# In the matter of Ravi Mahajan Vs. Sunrise 14 A-S, Denmark CA (AT) No. 141 & 146-2017

> NCLAT judgment dated 2017-12-06. Citation: TCN-2017-NCLAT-00025. The case involves appeals against orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Dec 2017
- **Citation:** TCN-2017-NCLAT-00025
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ravi-mahajan-vs-sunrise-14-a-s-denmark-ca-0b4327a7

## Summary

### Background

The case involves appeals against orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, which admitted an application filed by Sunrise 14 A/S, Denmark, claiming to be a Financial Creditor, against M/s. Muskaan Power Infrastructure Limited (‘Corporate Debtor’) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Adjudicating Authority had declared a moratorium and adjourned the case for the appointment of an Insolvency Resolution Professional. The appellant challenged these orders, arguing that the application was not maintainable due to the absence of a 'record of default' or certificate from a financial institution as required by the I&B Code.

## Facts

Sunrise 14 A/S, Denmark, a company incorporated under Danish Law, filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Muskaan Power Infrastructure Limited, claiming to be a Financial Creditor. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application, declared a moratorium, and adjourned the case for the appointment of an Insolvency Resolution Professional. The Appellant challenged the orders, arguing that the application was not maintainable due to the absence of a 'record of default' or certificate from a financial institution. The Respondent argued that the objections were not raised before the Adjudicating Authority and that the court should follow a purposive interpretation. The amount of default was shown to be USD$ 190,210

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, was complete …

**Ratio:** The provision of sub-clause (3)(a) of Section 7 of the I&B Code is mandatory and not

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 7(3)(a) of the I&B Code and related rules

…

**Application:** In this case, the court found that the application preferred by the Respondent

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Ravi Ma…
- **Respondents:** Muskaan Power…; Sunrise 14 A/S…

## Timeline

- **2017-07-28 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, admitted…
- **2017-08-03 — Subsequent Order by…**: The Adjudicating Authority appointed an Interim Resolution Professional and passed…

## 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/ravi-mahajan-vs-sunrise-14-a-s-denmark-ca-0b4327a7