# In the matter of Span Engineers vs. Pragati Infra and Engineering LLP

> NCLAT judgment dated 2026-04-29. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00150. SPAN ENGINEERS, an Operational Creditor, filed an application under Section 9 of the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 29 Apr 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00150
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/span-engineers-vs-pragati-infra-and-engineering-llp-01f015e9

## Summary

### Background

SPAN ENGINEERS, an Operational Creditor, filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against PRAGATI INFRA AND ENGINEERING LLP, the Corporate Debtor, seeking initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for an alleged operational debt of Rs. 1.26 Cr. The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Chandigarh Bench) dismissed this application via an order dated 09.05.2025, citing pre-existing dispute, non-fulfilment of the threshold requirement, and applicability of Section 10A of the IBC. Aggrieved by this dismissal, SPAN ENGINEERS preferred an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).

## Facts

The Appellant, Span Engineers (Operational Creditor), was engaged by the Respondent, Pragati Infra and Engineering LLP (Corporate Debtor), for civil works, supply of goods, and services under a work order dated 01.05.2020.

Span Engineers claimed to have executed the works and raised three invoices dated 07.06.2020, 05.01.2021, and 09.02.2021, totaling Rs. 1,26,89,529.34/-.

The Corporate Debtor made partial payments against the first and second invoices, but the Appellant claimed the entire payment should have been made within six months from the last invoice date (09.02.2021).

An unpaid operational debt allegedly became due and payable, leading the Appellant to issue a demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC on 01.04.2023.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in dismissing the Section 9 application on the grounds of …

**Ratio:** A Section 9 application must be rejected if there is a genuine pre-existing dispute, even

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority found that payment terms required mutual agreement on bills

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLAT referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in *Mobilox Innovations (P)

…

**Application:** Given the detailed objections raised by the Corporate Debtor in its reply to

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…
- **Appellants:** SPAN ENGI…
- **Respondents:** PRAGATI INFRA AND…
- **Advocates:** S. Vedh…

## Timeline

- **2020-05-01 — Work Order…**: Work order issued by Corporate Debtor to Operational Creditor for civil works and supply…
- **2020-06-07 — First Invoice…**: First invoice raised by…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

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/span-engineers-vs-pragati-infra-and-engineering-llp-01f015e9