# In the matter of Surendra Kanhaiyalal Shah vs. Magicon Impex Private Limited

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-02-20. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00627. The appeal was filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by Mr.…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 20 Feb 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00627
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/surendra-kanhaiyalal-shah-vs-magicon-impex-private-limited-140cf76c

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by Mr. Surendra Kanhaiyalal Shah, the Appellant, against an order dated 03.07.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court-II) in Company Petition No. (IB)-865(ND)/2022. The Adjudicating Authority had dismissed the Section 7 petition filed by the Appellant, who was the Financial Creditor and Proprietor of Shah Photo Film Company, seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor, Magicon Impex Private Limited, the Respondent.

## Facts

Mr. Surendra Kanhaiyalal Shah, the Appellant, entered into an agreement with Magicon Impex Private Limited, the Respondent, where the Appellant was appointed as a Consignment and Freight Agent (CFA). The agreement was valid for one year starting from 28.02.2019. As part of the agreement, the Appellant deposited Rs. 70,00,000/- as a refundable security deposit with the Respondent, which was to be treated as an investment. The Respondent was to provide a return of 1% per month, along with a commission of 1% per month on monthly sales turnover. Dissatisfied with the business, the Appellant terminated the agreement on 11.12.2019 and sought a refund of the security deposit. The Respondent failed to clear the outstanding dues, leading the Appellant to file a Section 7

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in dismissing the Section 7 petition filed by the …

**Ratio:** The threshold limit for initiating CIRP under Section 4 of the IBC is Rs. 1 crore. The

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority determined that the outstanding financial debt was only Rs.

…

**Interpretation:** Section 4 of the IBC sets the minimum threshold for initiating CIRP. The

…

**Application:** In this case, the Adjudicating Authority found that the outstanding financial

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Surendra Kanaiyala…
- **Respondents:** Magicon Impex…

## Timeline

- **2019-02-28 — Agreement…**: Agreement between Mr. Surendra Kanhaiyalal Shah and Magicon Impex Private Limited, valid…
- **2019-11-12 — Agreement Ter…**: Mr. Surendra Kanhaiyalal Shah terminated the agreement due to dissatisfaction with the…

## 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/surendra-kanhaiyalal-shah-vs-magicon-impex-private-limited-140cf76c