# In the matter of V Venkata Satyanarayana, vs. Pattabi Enterprise & Ors. IA Nos.1058 & 1059-2022 in Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.427-2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-12-13. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00036. The case involves an appeal against the 'impugned order' dated 30.06.2022 passed by the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 13 Dec 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00036
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/v-venkata-satyanarayana-vs-pattabi-enterprise-ors-ia-nos1058-1059-2022-in-compan-0cf6ebb4

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against the 'impugned order' dated 30.06.2022 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad Bench, in CP(IB) No.320/9/HDB/2021. The appellant, the 'Suspended Board of Director' of the 'Corporate Debtor', is dissatisfied with the NCLT's decision to admit the application filed by the 'Operational Creditor'. The NCLT had observed discrepancies in the Corporate Debtor's claims regarding fictitious invoices and the quality of goods supplied. The Corporate Debtor argued that there was a pre-existing dispute and that the Operational Creditor's claim was based on invoices for goods not supplied or of poor quality.

## Facts

Mr. V Venkata Satyanarayana, representing the Corporate Debtor, appealed against an order by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad, which admitted an application by M/s Pattabi Enterprise, the Operational Creditor, under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Operational Creditor claimed a total sum of Rs.2,90,30,715/- from the Corporate Debtor for packaging materials supplied. The Corporate Debtor contested the claim, alleging fictitious invoices, poor quality of goods, and a pre-existing dispute. The NCLT found that the Corporate Debtor's defenses were unsubstantiated. The Corporate Debtor argued that it had not acknowledged the debt and that the Operational Creditor had filed a false criminal case. The Operational Creditor claimed that the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the 'Adjudicating Authority' committed an 'error' in 'admitting' the 'Application' filed by …

**Ratio:** The 'Adjudicating Authority' is empowered to admit an application if a 'Default' has

…

**Reasoning:** The tribunal found that the 'Adjudicating Authority' had correctly assessed the facts and

…

**Interpretation:** The 'Adjudicating Authority' must determine whether a 'Default' has occurred

…

**Application:** In this case, the tribunal found that the 'Adjudicating Authority' had

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. Venu…; Naresh Sa…
- **Appellants:** V Venkata…
- **Respondents:** M/s Pattabi…

## Timeline

- **2021-01-01 — CP(IB) No.320/9…**: Filing of CP(IB) No.320/9/HDB/2021 by the Operational Creditor before the National…
- **2022-06-30 — Impugned…**: Date of the 'impugned order' passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad…

## 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/v-venkata-satyanarayana-vs-pattabi-enterprise-ors-ia-nos1058-1059-2022-in-compan-0cf6ebb4