# In the matter of S. Gopi Proprietor Goutham roadways Vs.  Empee Distilleries Ltd. Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No. 306 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-09-29. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00182. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 10.06.2022 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 29 Sept 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00182
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/s-gopi-proprietor-goutham-roadways-vs-empee-distilleries-ltd-company-appeal-9f50811e

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 10.06.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority/National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench-II, which dismissed an application filed by the appellant, S. Gopi, an operational creditor of M/s Empee Distilleries Limited, the corporate debtor. The appellant sought a direction to the respondents to make payment of Rs. 62,31,242/- from the contingency fund established under the resolution plan. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application primarily because the appellant failed to submit the necessary supporting documents to substantiate the claim within the stipulated timeframe of the CIRP.

## Facts

S. Gopi, proprietor of Goutham Roadways, is an operational creditor of M/s Empee Distilleries Limited, the corporate debtor. Gopi claimed Rs. 62,31,242/- for transportation services provided to Empee Distilleries since 2005. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Empee Distilleries commenced on 01.11.2018. A resolution plan was approved on 20.01.2020, which included a contingency fund of Rs. 7 Crore for six months from the approval date. The Resolution Professional requested Gopi to submit supporting documents for his claim by 29.07.2019. Gopi failed to provide the necessary documents, and the Resolution Professional rejected the claim on 17.08.2019. Gopi filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority, seeking payment from the contingency fund,

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the ‘Resolution Professional' was right in rejecting claims of ‘Appellants' with reasoning …

**Ratio:** Section 9(3) of the I&B Code, 2016 specifies the documents an operational creditor

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal noted that the Resolution Professional had no access to the Corporate

…

**Interpretation:** The Resolution Professional is justified in rejecting claims if the operational

…

**Application:** In this case, the Appellant failed to provide the necessary documents to

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Naresh Sa…; M. Venu…
- **Appellants:** S. G…
- **Respondents:** M/s. Empee…

## Timeline

- **2018-11-01 — Commencement…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of…
- **2019-01-29 — End of 90-day period…**: 90 days prescribed in the IBBI (Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations,…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/s-gopi-proprietor-goutham-roadways-vs-empee-distilleries-ltd-company-appeal-9f50811e