# In the matter of Smart Timing Steel Ltd. Vs. National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. CA(AT)(Insolvency)No.04 of 2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2019-11-13. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLAT-00151. The Appellant, Smart Timing Steel Ltd., filed an application under Section 9 of the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 13 Nov 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLAT-00151
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/smart-timing-steel-ltd-vs-national-steel-agro-industries-ltd-ca-97be4b2e

## Summary

### Background

The Appellant, Smart Timing Steel Ltd., filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, Mumbai, rejected the application on October 31, 2018, because a copy of the certificate from the Financial institution reflecting non-payment of the operational debt had not been filed. The Demand Notice was issued on December 23, 2016, demanding payment of the amounts involved in default to the Corporate Debtor. The Operational Creditor filed a Petition 06/I&BP/NCLT/MAH/2017 before the Adjudicating Authority under Section 9. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the

…

## Facts

Smart Timing Steel Ltd. (Operational Creditor) filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. (Corporate Debtor). The Adjudicating Authority, Mumbai Bench, rejected the application on October 31, 2018, because a certificate from the Financial institution reflecting non-payment of the operational debt was not filed. A Demand Notice was issued on December 23, 2016, for payment of the amounts in default. The Operational Creditor had previously filed a Petition 06/I&BP/NCLT/MAH/2017 under Section 9, but the Adjudicating Authority rejected the claim on January 30, 2017, due to the Operational Creditor's failure to produce the

…

## Issues and analysis

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

**Ratio:** A second petition for the same

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the petition because an earlier petition under

…

**Interpretation:** The principle of res judicata prevents the same parties from relitigating

…

**Application:** In this case, the Appellant had previously filed a petition under Section 9 for

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; A.I.S. C…; +2 more
- **Appellants:** Smart Timing…
- **Respondents:** National Steel &…
- **Advocates:** Sanjay G…; Shivlal…; +3 more

## Timeline

- **2016-12-23 — Demand Notice…**: Demand Notice was issued demanding payment of the amounts involved in default to the…
- **2017-01-30 — Claim Rej…**: The Adjudicating Authority rejected the claim because the Operational Creditor was unable…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 3(14) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-3)

---

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/smart-timing-steel-ltd-vs-national-steel-agro-industries-ltd-ca-97be4b2e