SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 866

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Shri. JYOTI KUMAR TRIPATHI, Shri. RAVICHANDRAN RAMASAMY, JJ
Savitri Telecom services – Appellant
Versus
Lookman Electroplast services Pvt Ltd – Respondent
CP(IB)/8(CHE)/2024



Advocates:
For the Operational Creditor: K.S Shankar Chakrapani
For the Corporate Debtor:Mr Om Prakash, Dhruv Gupta Advocate.

The absence of a direct contractual relationship and pre-existing disputes negates the claim for initiating insolvency proceedings under the IBC.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 9 - Operational Creditor filed an application to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Corporate Debtor for an unpaid debt of Rs. 12,35,52,453, which includes principal and interest - The Corporate Debtor disputed the existence of a direct contractual obligation with the Operational Creditor, claiming a lack of privity of contract and pre-existing disputes. (Paras 1, 6, 34)

(B) Corporate Debtor's obligations - The Tribunal found that the operational debt claimed by the Applicant was contingent on the contractual obligations of Qognify, which had not been fulfilled, leading to the conclusion that there was no crystallized debt or default. (Paras 31, 34)

Facts of the case:
The Operational Creditor sought to initiate insolvency proceedings against the Corporate Debtor based on an unpaid debt from a purchase order related to the Agra Smart City project, where the Corporate Debtor had engaged Qognify for software supply.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal held that there was no direct contractual relationship between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor, thus no crystallized debt existed for insolvency proceedings.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the existence of a contractual relationship and whether the debt was crystallized and in default.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal ruled that without a direct contractual obligation, the Operational Creditor could not claim debt against the Corporate Debtor, and the pre-existing disputes negated the claim for insolvency.

Result: Application to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process dismissed.

Table of Content
1. operational creditor filed for insolvency based on an unpaid debt related to a project. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. corporate debtor disputes the existence of a direct contractual obligation. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
3. tribunal examines the contractual obligations and relationships among parties. (Para 14 , 15 , 20 , 21)

ORDER

Under Adjudication is CP(IB)/8(CHE)/2024 which has been filed by Savitri Telecom services (hereinafter referred to asOperational Creditor’ under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code 2016 (in short, ‘IBC, 2016’) r/w Rule 6 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 against Lookman Electroplast services Pvt Ltd (hereinafter referred to as ‘Corporate Debtor’). It is prayed by the applicant to admit the Application and initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor, declare moratorium and to appoint an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).

2. Part I of the application sets out the details of the Applicant, the Operational Creditor Savitri Telecom services, is having registered address at 203,2nd floor, Ansal Chamber-II,6 Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066 Part II of the application sets out the details of the Corporate debtor as Lookman Electroplast services Pvt Ltd with the registered address at old No 8 & 9 , new no 15 2nd street Extension 3rd main road , CIT Nagar Nandanam, Chennai 600035. As per Part III of the application, the Operational Creditor has proposed the name of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) as Ankit Gupta with IBBI registration number IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P02304/2021- 2022/13704.

3. Part IV of the application signifies the amount of debt to the tune of Rs. 6,44,42,191/- (Rupees Six Crores Forty-Four Lakhs Forty-Two Thousand one Hundred and Ninety one only) as the outstanding and along with the interest of Rs 5,91,10,262 (Rupees Five crores Ninety one lakhs ten thousand one hundred and ninety one only) in total Rs 12,35,52,453 is dues that is payable by the Corporate Debtor. The date of default is mentioned as from 22.07.2019 to 18.05.2023 and the operational creditor has not mentioned specific date of default. FACTS OF THE CASE

4. Bharat Electronics Limited is the successful bidder of Agra Smart city project for undertaking a defined work in relation to setting up command & control center and city surveillance ( Herein after referred as work)for Agra smart city limited, In relation to the said work Bharat Electronics limited had engaged corporate debtor, The corporate debtor was required to import software component of integrated command and control center (Herein after referred as product) from Qognify Limited (Company incorporated under laws of Israel) for the Agra smart city project.

5. The Applicant Savitri Telecom services submits that They raised purchase order to Qognify and imported the products, for the corporate debtor and the Applicant have paid applicable GST amount for the same, It is stated that a Purchase order was issued by Corporate debtor to the Applicant on 21.05.2019 For total amount of Rs 6,42,98,325 and It is agreed that an advance amount 25% would be paid within 15 days, and balance 75% amount within 60 days from delivery of the products.

6. The Applicant stated that in discharge of corporate debtor liability, corporate debtor has given Cheques which were not honoured, by the corporate debtor where Cheque dated 05.06.2019 was not honoured as the corporate debtor did not have sufficient funds and Cheque dated 04.08.2019 was presented by operational creditor which was returned as ‚Payment stopped by the Drawer‛. Subsequently, on 29.07.2019 Corporate debtor paid Rs 50,00,000/- Through RTGS. It is stated that the post-dated cheque was issued dated 30.11.2019 for the balance of Rs 7,08,72,023 which was also dishonoured as ‚Funds Insufficient‛.

7. It is stated by the Applicant that in the Minutes of Meeting the corporate debtor has admitted not making payment to the corporate debtor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top