# In the matter of Unimark Remedies Ltd. IA-294-2022 in CP(IB)-197-MB-2018

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-04-17. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-03776. Alkush Hospitality, a service provider, filed an application seeking direction to the…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 17 Apr 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-03776
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/unimark-remedies-ltd-ia-294-2022-in-cpib-197-mb-2018-a73aa2fc

## Summary

### Background

Alkush Hospitality, a service provider, filed an application seeking direction to the Resolution Professional (RP) to pay dues of Rs. 7,39,708 for services provided to Unimark Remedies Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period. The applicant provided canteen services to the Corporate Debtor from February 2016 under a service contract, which was renewed on January 29, 2018. CIRP commenced on April 3, 2018, and Amit Gupta was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The applicant continued providing services until March 2020. The RP did not pay the outstanding balance, leading to the application.

## Facts

Alkush Hospitality provided canteen services to Unimark Remedies Ltd. from February 2016 under a service contract. The contract was renewed on January 29, 2018, for a period from February 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019. The CIRP of Unimark Remedies Ltd. commenced on April 3, 2018, with ICICI Bank as the Financial Creditor. Amit Gupta was appointed as the IRP. Alkush Hospitality continued providing services until March 2020. The outstanding balance of Rs. 7,39,708 was not paid. The RP claimed that only Rs. 3,99,928 was due during the CIRP period, while Rs. 7,76,970 was outstanding prior to CIRP, out of which Rs. 4,37,190 was paid. The RP had filed an application for approval of the Resolution Plan, which prioritized CIRP costs. The applicant approached the Tribunal

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the amount claimed by the applicant is …

**Ratio:** The legal principle applied is that CIRP costs have priority in payment under the

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT reasoned that only the amount falling under CIRP costs (Rs. 3,99,928) had

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that amounts due before the CIRP commencement date are

…

**Application:** The NCLT applied this reasoning to the facts by determining that the portion of

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Prabhat…; KISHORE VEMULAPALL…
- **Appellants:** Alkush Hosp…
- **Respondents:** Unimark Remedies…; Amit G…

## Timeline

- **2016-02-01 — Service Co…**: Alkush Hospitality entered into a service…
- **2018-01-29 — Contract R…**: The service contract between Alkush…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/unimark-remedies-ltd-ia-294-2022-in-cpib-197-mb-2018-a73aa2fc