# M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd vs. M/s Tanisha Scaffolding (India) Pvt Ltd

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-10-09. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-01244. M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd (Operational Creditor) filed a petition under Section 9 of the…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 9 Oct 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-01244
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-bengaluru/tanisha-scaffolding-india-private-limited-weu4c

## Summary

### Background

M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd (Operational Creditor) filed a petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s Tanisha Scaffolding (India) Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor) for an alleged operational debt of ₹30,43,360/-. The petition was initially dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority on 05.09.2019 for failure to establish debt and default. The Operational Creditor appealed to the NCLAT, which set aside the dismissal order on 11.06.2024 and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, noting that uncontroverted pleadings could be deemed admitted.

## Facts

M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd (Operational Creditor) filed a Company Petition under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016, against M/s Tanisha Scaffolding (India) Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor).

The petition sought initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for an alleged operational debt of ₹30,43,360/-.

The Adjudicating Authority initially dismissed the petition on 05.09.2019, finding that the Operational Creditor failed to establish the existence of debt and default.

The Operational Creditor appealed to the NCLAT (TA (AT) No. 206/2021).

The NCLAT, Chennai, set aside the dismissal order on 11.06.2024 and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, allowing the Corporate Debtor to file objections.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Operational Creditor has established an outstanding operational debt bereft of …

**Ratio:** An application under Section 9 of the IBC must be rejected if a real dispute, not

…

**Reasoning:** The Corporate Debtor categorically denied the existence of the transactions forming the

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLT interpreted the 'existence of a dispute' broadly, in line with the

…

**Application:** Applying these principles, the NCLT found that the defence raised by the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Sunil Kumar…; Radhakrishna…
- **Appellants:** M/s APL Apollo…
- **Respondents:** M/s Tanisha…
- **Other parties:** APL Apollo Tubes…
- **Advocates:** Mahima Khan…; Rishab…; +1 more

## Timeline

- **2018-02-01 — Demand Notice…**: The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice under Section 8 of the Code to the…
- **2018-02-05 — Demand Notice…**: The demand notice issued by the Operational Creditor was duly served on the Corporate…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/nclt-bengaluru/tanisha-scaffolding-india-private-limited-weu4c