One97 Communications Limited (Operational Creditor) filed a Restoration Application in CP (IB) No. 3213/MB-VI/2018 to restore the Main Application, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.07.2021. The Main Application was filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Reliance Webstore Limited (Corporate Debtor) for debts amounting to Rs. 7,59,64,413/-.
One97 Communications Limited (PayTM) filed an application under Section 9 of the IBC to initiate CIRP against Reliance Webstore Limited for debts amounting to Rs. 7,59,64,413. The application was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.07.2021 because the Operational Creditor (OC) did not appear. The OC claimed it was not informed of the hearing date. The Restoration Application was filed on 19.08.2022, after a delay of 387 days. The OC obtained a certified copy of the dismissal order on 05.08.2022. The Respondent/Corporate Debtor argued that the Restoration Application was barred by limitation and that the OC had not provided sufficient evidence of its attempts to follow up with the Registry. The court found that the OC was not properly notified of the hearing dates and
…Sign in to view the parties.
One97 Communications Limited filed the Main…
The Main Application was dismissed for…
One97 Communications Limited (Operational Creditor) filed a Restoration Application in CP (IB) No. 3213/MB-VI/2018 to restore the Main Application, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.07.2021. The Main Application was filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Reliance Webstore Limited (Corporate Debtor) for debts amounting to Rs. 7,59,64,413/-.
One97 Communications Limited (PayTM) filed an application under Section 9 of the IBC to initiate CIRP against Reliance Webstore Limited for debts amounting to Rs. 7,59,64,413. The application was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.07.2021 because the Operational Creditor (OC) did not appear. The OC claimed it was not informed of the hearing date. The Restoration Application was filed on 19.08.2022, after a delay of 387 days. The OC obtained a certified copy of the dismissal order on 05.08.2022. The Respondent/Corporate Debtor argued that the Restoration Application was barred by limitation and that the OC had not provided sufficient evidence of its attempts to follow up with the Registry. The court found that the OC was not properly notified of the hearing dates and
…One97 Communications Limited filed the Main…
The Main Application was dismissed for…