# In the matter of Rise India Padhopadhoan Private Limited IB-869-(ND)-2019

> NCLT judgment dated 2021-05-03. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLT-02227. Mukesh Bansal, the applicant, filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 3 May 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLT-02227
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/rise-india-padhopadhoan-private-limited-ib-869-nd-2019-d13dea48

## Summary

### Background

Mukesh Bansal, the applicant, filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against Rise India Padhopadhao Private Limited, the respondent, due to alleged default in clearing a debt of Rs. 22,52,050/- for services provided. The applicant was appointed as Chief Technology Officer in the respondent company on 02.08.2016. The respondent allegedly failed to pay the applicant's salary, leading to the resignation of the applicant on 15.05.2017. Despite repeated requests, the outstanding dues were not cleared. The applicant issued a demand notice on 14.01.2019, which was replied to by the respondent denying the submissions and requesting more time.

## Facts

Mukesh Bansal was appointed as Chief Technology Officer at Rise India Padhopadhao Private Limited on August 2, 2016. His remuneration was Rs. 25,00,000 per annum, with Rs. 5,00,000 as variable pay. The company also promised stock options. Bansal resigned on May 15, 2017, due to non-payment of salary and breach of trust. He claims the company owes him Rs. 22,52,050. He sent a demand notice on January 14, 2019, which the company denied, asking for more time. The company failed to attend the hearing, leading to an ex parte order. The operational creditor mentioned that full salary for the period of seven months i.e., November, 2016 to May, 2017 has not been paid.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application filed by the operational …

**Ratio:** The application must be filed within three years from the date the debt became due, as

…

**Reasoning:** The tribunal ascertained that the debt first became due in November 2016, and the

…

**Interpretation:** The Limitation Act sets a time limit for filing legal proceedings. In the

…

**Application:** Since the debt became due in November 2016 and the application was filed in

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** SHRI. P.S.N.…; V.K. SUB…
- **Appellants:** Mukesh B…
- **Respondents:** Rise India…

## Timeline

- **2016-08-02 — Appointment of…**: Mukesh Bansal was appointed as Chief Technology Officer in Rise India Padhopadhao Private…
- **2017-05-15 — Resignation of…**: Mukesh Bansal resigned from his position as Chief Technology Officer due to non-payment…

## 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-chandigarh/rise-india-padhopadhoan-private-limited-ib-869-nd-2019-d13dea48