# In the matter of Patanjali Paridhan Private Limited CP (IB) No.24-ALD-2022

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-05-30. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-03130. The Operational Creditor filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 30 May 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-03130
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/patanjali-paridhan-private-limited-cp-ib-no24-ald-2022-9abca912

## Summary

### Background

The Operational Creditor filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor due to an alleged default in payment for services rendered. The Corporate Debtor disputed the claim, citing a pre-existing dispute regarding the non-issuance of a No-Objection Certificate (NOC) for the intellectual property rights of the television commercial (TVC) produced.

## Facts

M/S Law & Kenneth Saatchi & Saatchi Private Limited, the Operational Creditor, filed an application on December 3, 2021, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. The application sought to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/S Patanjali Paridhan Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor, for a total outstanding amount of Rs. 1,76,12,000/-, which included an invoice amount of Rs. 1,19,00,000/- and interest at 24% per annum from March 1, 2019, to March 1, 2021. The Operational Creditor had undertaken to provide services for the production of a television commercial ( TVC ), print shoot, and digital content

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether there was a pre-existing dispute between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor …

**Ratio:** A pre-existing dispute, supported by plausible contention and evidence, even if its

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal found that the Corporate Debtor had repeatedly demanded the NOC, citing

…

**Interpretation:** The Tribunal interpreted Section 9(5)(ii)(d) of the IBC, in light of the

…

**Application:** The dispute over the NOC, evidenced by numerous emails and legal notices

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Praveen…; Ashish…; +2 more
- **Appellants:** M/S Law & Kenneth…
- **Respondents:** M/S Patanjali…
- **Advocates:** Somya Chat…; Sanjeev Kumar…; +7 more

## Timeline

- **October 17, 2018 — Proforma Invoi…**: Operational Creditor issued a proforma…
- **October 26, 2018 — Partial Payme…**: Corporate Debtor paid Rs.…

## 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-division-bench-court-i-chenn/patanjali-paridhan-private-limited-cp-ib-no24-ald-2022-9abca912