JUDGEMENT

[Per; Shreesha Merla, Member (T)] 1. Challenge in this Appeal is to the Impugned Order dated 27.07.2021 passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh) in C.P. (IB) No.9/CHD/HRY/2019, Greymatter Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Through its Authorised Representative Mr. Chandradev Bhagat Having its registered office at:

B—802, Express Zone, Western Express Highway, Malad (East), Mumbai – 400097 Email ID:

chandradev@greymatterentertainment.com …Appellant. Versus Pro Sportify Pvt. Ltd. Having its registered office at:

Plot No.243, Near ACC Cement Factory, Opp Halidram Khandsa Road, Village Mohammadpur, Jharsa, Gurugram – 122001 Email ID: ks@itvnetwork.com …Respondent. -2- Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1043 of 2021 by which Order, the Adjudicating Authority dismissed the Application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Code’) by ‘Operational Creditor’/‘M/s. Greymatter Entertainment Private Limited’, observing as follows:

“9. The second issue to be decided is whether the petitioner proved get, the debt and the liability of the respondent-corporate debtor to pay the same per the demand notice (Annexure-l) dated 20.09.2018 of the petitioner an amount of 830,05,590/- pertaining to Season 2 was due and an amount of ¢34.46.000/- in respect of Season 3 was due totalling an amount of 265.41.590/ was due from the respondent-corporate debtor. In reply to the said contention. the respondent- corporate debtor in its reply stated that it has paid an amount of 21.25 crores as against the agreement requirement of 21.20 crores in respect of Season 2 and has aid 21 crore in full and final settlement in respect of Season 3 for which no agreement was entered into.

The petitioner, in spite of the specific averments made by the respondent-corporate debtor in its reply, has not chosen to dispute the same by filing any rejoinder to the said reply. The petitioner has also not denied the contention of the corporate debtor that the invoices raised in respect of Season 3 were not in accordance with the work done and the amount. for the service was over charged and accordingly an amount of 21 crore has been paid in full and final settlement of all the claims in respect of Season 3 In the absence of specific denial of the averments made by the corporate debtor and since the petitioner failed to prove the debt and the liability to pay the same by the corporate debtor, this issue is held against the petitioner.” 2. Succinctly put, the facts in brief are that the ‘Operational Creditor’ is a Limited Liability Company which has provided services of Live TV Production of Season-1, Season-2 and Season-3 of the Pro Wrestling League (‘PWL’) held in India in 2015 to the ‘Corporate Debtor’. It is averred that it is only for the TV Services of Season-2 of PWL, that the ‘Operational Creditor’ had entered into a Live Production Agreement dated 29.01.2016. It is stated that the entire -3- Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1043 of 2021 consideration for the three Seasons was not paid and there is a ‘debt’ and ‘default’ and hence the ‘Operational Creditor’ preferred an Application under Section 9 of the Code.

3. Learned Counsel Mr Kuriakose Varghese appearing for the Appellant/‘Operational Creditor’ submitted that Live TV Production Services for Seasons-1, 2 & 3 were provided to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ for a total consideration of Rs.2,23,29,790/- for Season-1, Rs.1,20,00,000/- for Season- 2 and Rs.1,24,50,000/- for Season-3. It is submitted that out of the total invoices issued by the Appellant for all three Seasons of PWL, despite several emails and even a Legal Notice dated 24.01.2017, the ‘Corporate Debtor’ had defaulted in payment of Rs.65,41,590/- in addition to interest @12% p.a., the ‘date of default’ being 10.01.2017. A Demand Notice dated 20.09.2018, as required under Section 8 of the Code was sent to the ‘Corpora