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) 5713

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Shri. JYOTI KUMAR TRIPATHI, Shri. RAVICHANDRAN RAMASAMY, JJ
Arul Prasad Senniappan – Appellant
Versus
M/s Viprah Technologies Limited – Respondent
IBA/1297(CHE)/2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. P.J. Sri Ganesh, Mr. P.J. Rishikesh, Mr.Agil Vatchalam
For the Respondents: Mr. Pawan Jhabakh, Mr. Manivannan J, Mr. Antony R Julian

An operational creditor can recover dues under the IBC where the debt is acknowledged and no bona fide pre-existing dispute exists, regardless of allegations of misconduct by the debtor.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 9 - Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process initiated against Corporate Debtor for unpaid operational debt of Rs.10.50 lakhs arising from employment contracts - Claim deemed within limitation period due to acknowledgment of debt. (Paras 8.1, 8.6, 8.8, 8.25)

(B) Pre-existing Dispute - Allegations of misconduct and breach of duty do not constitute valid disputes entitling dismissal of the application under IBC. (Paras 8.7, 8.18)

(C) Acknowledgment of Debt - Informal minutes of meeting recognized payables, satisfying prescribed statutory requirements for acknowledging debts under the Limitation Act. (Paras 8.6, 8.19)

Facts of the case:
Operational Creditor claims unpaid salary dues amounting to Rs. 10.50 lakhs for services rendered as Director, with debt acknowledged by Corporate Debtor’s representatives in multiple documents, including meeting minutes and annual returns.

Findings of Court:
A legally enforceable operational debt of Rs.10.50 lakhs has been established, and no bona fide pre-existing dispute exists that would prevent the application from being admitted under Section 9.

Issues: Whether the petition is maintainable considering acknowledged debt versus alleged misconduct; whether the claim is within the limitation period; and whether a bona fide pre-existing dispute exists.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal found that the existence of salary dues was clearly established by acknowledgment in writing, and allegations of misconduct did not qualify as a substantive dispute.

Result: Application admitted and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process initiated.

Table of Content
1. jurisdiction of the tribunal (Para 1)
2. corporate debtor's denial of claims (Para 3)
3. final order and implications (Para 9)

ORDER

(Heard through Hybrid Mode)

This Application under Section 9 the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 has been filed by Arul Prasad Senniappan, Petitioner/ Operational Creditor herein against M/s. Viprah Technologies Limited, Respondent / Corporate Debtor herein for initiating Corporate Insolvency Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor.

2. SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPLICANT

2.1. Part I of the Application contains the particulars of the Applicant Arul Prasad Senniappan. Part II of the Application sets out the details of the Corporate Debtor. It was incorporated on 06.10.1986 with paid up share capital of Rs. 7,20,00,000/- and address at S.F.No.79, Alampalayam Road, Thakkalur, Avinashi Taluk, Coimbatore – 641 654, Tamil Nadu, within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. In Part III of the application, the Operational Creditor has proposed CA S. Prabhu as the IRP. Part IV of the application sets out the details of the debt being Rs.10,50,000/- (Rupees ten lakh fifty thousand only) on account of the services rendered as the Whole Time Director of the Respondent / Corporate Debtor and work undertaken with date of default as 01.04.2017. This application has been filed on17.10.2019.

2.2. The Applicant submits that he was appointed as Director (Operations) of the Corporate Debtor by virtue of a Director Employment Agreement executed on 01.08.2015, to manage and oversee the business and operational activities of the Corporate Debtor. Under the said agreement, the Applicant was entitled to a remuneration of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand only) per month, together with such allowances and perquisites as were customarily applicable to similar positions.

2.3. It is further stated that the Applicant discharged his duties as Director (Operations) during the period from 01.01.2016 to 31.03.2017, for which a total remuneration of Rs.10,50,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) became due and payable by the Corporate Debtor. The said amount constitutes an operational debt within the meaning of Section5(21) of the Code.

2.4. The Applicant submits that despite repeated reminders and assurances, the Corporate Debtor failed to release the above dues. It is further submitted that the Corporate Debtor has, from time to time, admitted and acknowledged its liability towards the Applicant. The last such acknowledgment and promise to pay is stated to be recorded in the Minutes of Meeting dated 15.12.2018, wherein the Corporate Debtor categorically admitted the amount of Rs. 10.50 lakhs as outstanding.

2.5. The Applicant has therefore contended that the date of default commenced on 01.04.2017, and that the amount remains unpaid till date, thereby rendering the Corporate Debtor liable to proceedings under Section 9 of the Code.

2.6. In compliance with the mandatory requirements under Section 8 (1) of the Code, the Applicant issued a Demand Notice in Form 3 dated 16.09.2019, demanding payment of the outstanding amount of Rs. 10.50 lakhs. The said notice was duly served upon the Corporate Debtor at its registered office address. However, no reply raising any dispute, nor any payment, was received from the Corporate Debtor within the statutory period of ten (10) days.

2.7. It is submitted that there exists no pre-existing dispute in respect of the said operational debt, nor has any suit, arbitration, or other proceeding been initiated by or against the Applicant concerning the same. It is further submitted that the default on the part of the Corporate Debtor is clear and undisputed, and hence, the present petition is maintainable under Section9 of the Code.

2.8. The Applicant has proposed the appointment of CA S. Prabhu (Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P01275/2018-2019/11948), as the Interim Resolution Profe

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