# In the matter of Tijaria Polypipes Limited Vs. Kevadiya Construction Pvt. Ltd. CA (AT) (Ins) No. 85 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2021-11-17. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLAT-00051. This is an appeal filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 17 Nov 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLAT-00051
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/tijaria-polypipes-limited-vs-kevadiya-construction-pvt-ltd-ca-acf5ff23

## Summary

### Background

This is an appeal filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, challenging an order dated 2nd November, 2020, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Ahmedabad Bench, which dismissed a petition filed by the Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the IBC. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the petition due to a dispute regarding the quality of goods supplied by the Appellant and a mismatch in the consignment number between the track report and postal receipt, indicating non-service of notice under Section 8 of the IBC.

## Facts

Tijaria Polypipes Limited (Appellant) filed an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Ahmedabad Bench. The Appellant is a manufacturer of plastic products. Kevadiya Construction Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent) issued a purchase order to the Appellant on March 9, 2018, and made an advance payment on March 29, 2018, of Rs.9,65,554. The Appellant supplied goods worth Rs.91,57,699 to the Corporate Debtor. The Respondent raised objections regarding the quality of the goods on May 24, 2018. The Appellant took back some defective goods and issued credit notes worth Rs.47,51,473. A balance amount of Rs.34,40,672 remained due. The Appellant issued a demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC on June 27, 2019, demanding Rs.41,21,405,

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority's order dismissing the petition filed by the Operational …

**Ratio:** The IBC is not intended to be a substitute for a recovery forum and cannot be invoked

…

**Reasoning:** The court found that there was a pre-existing dispute between the parties regarding the

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted the provisions of the IBC and the Supreme Court's ruling

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts of the case and found that there was a

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Jarat Kuma…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Tijaria Polypipes…
- **Respondents:** Kevadiya Construct…

## Timeline

- **2018-03-09 — Purchase Orde…**: The Respondent issued a Purchase Order to…
- **2018-03-29 — Advance P…**: The Respondent made an advance payment…

## 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/tijaria-polypipes-limited-vs-kevadiya-construction-pvt-ltd-ca-acf5ff23