# In the matter of Silvassa Cement Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Noor India Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. CA (AT) (Ins) No. 675 of 2020

> NCLAT judgment dated 2021-01-22. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLAT-00394. The case involves an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 22 Jan 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLAT-00394
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/silvassa-cement-products-pvt-ltd-vs-noor-india-buildcon-pvt-ltd-ca-5b72d2c4

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, which dismissed an application filed by Silvassa Cement Products Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor) under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Noor India Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor). The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application on the ground that it was non-maintainable due to defects in the application, specifically the omission of proper signatures and notarization as required in Form 5.

## Facts

Silvassa Cement Products Pvt. Ltd., an Operational Creditor, filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Noor India Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, dismissed the application, deeming it non-maintainable. The dismissal was based on the grounds that the application was defective because it lacked proper signatures and notarization as required in Form 5. Specifically, the application was signed by two advocates, Mr. Niraj Shah and Mr. Dhruv K. Dave, without recording the date, instead of being signed by the authorized person, Mr. Praveen Kumar B. Mundra, as per the Board

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was justified in dismissing the application under Section 9 of …

**Ratio:** An application should not be dismissed as non-maintainable for minor technical defects,

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority had noticed the Board Resolution passed on 28th September,

…

**Interpretation:** The term 'non-maintainability' should be interpreted strictly and should not be

…

**Application:** In this case, the application was dismissed because it was signed by two

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Bansi Lal…; KanthiNar…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Silvassa Cement…
- **Respondents:** Noor India…

## Timeline

- **2021-01-22 — Application…**: Application filed by the Appellant – Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the…
- **2020-06-15 — Impugned Ord…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench Ahmedabad…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/silvassa-cement-products-pvt-ltd-vs-noor-india-buildcon-pvt-ltd-ca-5b72d2c4