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) 2386

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Shri.Prabhat Kumar Justice V.G Bisht, J
Air Wave Technocrafts Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Voltas Limited – Respondent
CP (IB) 939/MB /2024



Advocates:
For the Operational Creditor: Mr.Vishal Agarwal, Adv.
For the Corporate Debtor: Mr. Avinash Joshi, Adv.

The court ruled that the petition for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was time-barred due to lack of valid acknowledgment of debt and insufficient documentation supporting the claim.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 9 - Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - Petition filed by Operational Creditor for non-payment of operational debt - Corporate Debtor disputed the claim on grounds of limitation, lack of supporting documents, and discrepancies in invoices - The court found no valid acknowledgment of debt and ruled that the petition was time-barred. (Paras 40, 41)

(B) Limitation Act, 1963 - The court held that each invoice constitutes an independent default and the limitation period cannot be extended by partial payments or email correspondences. (Paras 40, 41)

Facts of the case:
The Operational Creditor filed the petition claiming unpaid operational debt amounting to Rs. 1,51,12,342.00, with the date of default cited as 11.08.2022. The Corporate Debtor denied liability, claiming the debt was time-barred and lacked supporting documentation.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Operational Creditor failed to provide necessary documentation and that the claim was barred by limitation. The date of default was established as prior to the petition, making it unmaintainable.

Issues: The main issue was whether the claim was time-barred and if the Operational Creditor provided sufficient documentation to support the claim.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petition was dismissed due to lack of acknowledgment of debt and that the invoices were time-barred under the Limitation Act.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petition filed under section 9 for operational debt. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. operational creditor claims unpaid debt and details of service provided. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
3. corporate debtor disputes claim on various grounds. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
4. court's observations on documentation and disputes. (Para 37 , 38 , 39)
5. court's ruling on limitation and dismissal of the petition. (Para 40 , 41)

ORDER

1. This Petition CP (IB) 939/MB/2024 is filed by Air Wave Technocrafts Private Limited (hereinafter referred as ‘Applicant’/ ‘Operational Creditor’) under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity ‘the Code/IBC’) seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) against Voltas Limited (hereinafter referred as ‘Respondent’/ ‘Corporate Debtor’) for non- payment of total Operational Debt of Rs. 1,51,12,342.00/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty-One lacs twelve Thousand Three Hundred Forty-Two only), along with interest at the rate of 12% P.a. The Interest thereon calculated w.e.f. 27.12.2021.

2. The principal amount is Rs. 1,20,46,835.00 /- (Rupees Three Crore Fifty-Four Lakh Sixty-Six Thousand Seven Hundred Forty-Two Only), and with simple interest of Rs. 30,65,507.00/- (Rupees Thirty Lacs Sixty-Five Thousand Five Hundred Seven only).

3. The date of default, as per Part IV of the Application, is 11.08.2022.

Submissions made by the Operational Creditor/Petitioner:

4. The Operational Creditor is a Company, incorporated under• the Companies Act, 1956 and is a registered under MSME.

5. The applicant provided services of operation and maintenance of HVAC Systems at the sites

6. The Corporate Debtor approached the Operational Creditor requesting for the services to be made at the sites of the various client of the Corporate Debtor, for which running account is maintained with the Corporate Debtor and invoices have been raised and paid since 2010 until 2019.

7. The amount of operational debt of Rs. 1,20,46,835.00 fell due against various unpaid Bills raised for the services rendered by the applicant to the clients of the Corporate Debtor, for which the payments have already been realised by the Corporate Debtor from its clients. After multiple mails and reminders, on 11.08.2022, the Corporate Debtor arbitrarily denied the payments of unpaid invoices and therefore, considered to have committed default. The Corporate debtor confirmed the part payment of Rs. 15.03 lac towards full and final settlement on 22.12.2022.

8. The last invoice was raised on 07.01.2019, and the Corporate Debtor continued to make part payments.

9. Due to pending unpaid invoices, the Operational Creditor pursued regular follow-ups. On 14.08.2020, the Corporate Debtor informed that the matter had been forwarded to its commercial team for verification.

10. A payment of Rs. 7,81,313.28 was received on 18.02.2021 towards the outstanding operational dues.

11. The Corporate Debtor, through email dated 11.08.2022, dishonestly denied further payments citing alleged non-compliance and non- availability of records. This denial is considered as the date of default under the Code.

12. Despite the earlier denial, the Corporate Debtor acknowledged a part payment and proposed a full and final settlement of Rs. 15.03 lakhs on 22.12.2022, without addressing the remaining claims.

13. The Operational Creditor registered the debt with the Information Utility on 13.02.2023 and re-submitted it on 19.06.2023, prompting NeSL to email the Corporate Debtor for confirmation, which went unanswered.

14. Continuous email correspondences regarding outstanding invoices and reminders were sent, and replies were received acknowledging the issue or seeking commercial verification.

15. On 17.02.2024, a Demand Notice in Form-3 was sent via email on 18.02.2024. The Corporate Debtor vide its reply dated 01.03.2024 has denied its liability raising certain disputes and also the limitation aspect. The sa

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