# In the matter of Sandeep Reddy & Anr. Vs. Jaycon Infrastructure Ltd. CA (AT) No. 228-2017

> NCLAT judgment dated 2017-10-26. Citation: TCN-2017-NCLAT-00089. The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 26 Oct 2017
- **Citation:** TCN-2017-NCLAT-00089
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sandeep-reddy-anr-vs-jaycon-infrastructure-ltd-ca-0f13b600

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Hyderabad Bench, which admitted an application preferred by the Respondent-'Operational Creditor' under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant argued that a dispute existed prior to the issuance of the demand notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code. The Adjudicating Authority appointed an Interim Resolution Professional without suggestion from the Operational Creditor or the Board. The respondent appeared and accepted that the Interim Resolution Professional was not appointed on their suggestion. The parties reached a settlement in writing.

## Facts

A sub-contract works agreement was reached between Sandeep Reddy & Anr. (appellants) and Jaycon Infrastructure Ltd. (respondent). The scheduled completion date for the works was December 31, 2012, based on an agreement dated April 19, 2011. The appellant claimed the respondent failed to complete the works by that date. The respondent continued the works until May 2014, completing only 78% of the agreement value and then allegedly abandoned the works. The Adjudicating Authority admitted an application by the respondent (Operational Creditor) under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant argued that a dispute existed before the issuance of the demand notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code. An Interim Resolution Professional was

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application under Section 9 of the I&B Code was maintainable given the existence of …

**Ratio:** An application under Section 9 of the I&B Code is not maintainable if a dispute

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the existence of a dispute prior to the issuance of the demand

…

**Interpretation:** Section 9 of the I&B Code allows an operational creditor to initiate the

…

**Application:** In this case, the court found that a dispute existed prior to the issuance of

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Sandeep Reddy &…
- **Respondents:** Jaycon Infrastruct…
- **Advocates:** Arun Kath…; Swapnil…; +5 more

## Timeline

- **2011-04-19 — Agreement…**: Date of the works…
- **2012-12-31 — Scheduled Completion…**: Scheduled completion date for…

## 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/sandeep-reddy-anr-vs-jaycon-infrastructure-ltd-ca-0f13b600