##PAGE1##

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL COURT-V NEW DELHI BENCH IN COMPANY PETITION (IB) NO. 616/ND/2025 An Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S GLOBAL SURVEYORS Through its Proprietor Smt. Ratna Chattaraj Address: Puspanjali, Searsole, Babupara P.O. - Searsole Rajbari, Burdwan West Bengal, India, Pin-713358 …Applicant /Operational Creditor Versus WAPCOS LIMITED Address: 5th Floor Kailash, 26 Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi, Delhi, India, Pin-110001 …Respondent/Corporate Debtor Order Delivered on: 03.09.2026 CORAM:

SHRI MANNI SANKARIAH SHANMUGA SUNDARAM, HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

MS. REENA SINHA PURI, HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

APPEARANCES:

For the Applicant: CS Anjan Kumar Roy, PCS, CS Sandip Paul, PCS.

For the Respondent Adv. Tushar Sannu, Adv. Priyankar Tiwary, Adv.

Pulak Gupta Joshi, Adv. Mohit Bhardwaj along with Mr. Rajat Jain & Mr. Ashish for CD

1. This Application is filed, by M/s Global Surveyors, hereinafter referred as Operational Creditor/Petitioner), against WAPCOS Limited, hereinafter referred as Corporate Debtor (CD/ Respondent), seeking initiation of CIRP, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. under Section 9 of the IBC, ORDER. It is claimed by the OC/ Petitioner that CD/ Respondent has committed default in payment of operational debt of Rs.

1,07,83,495.

Submissions by the Operational Creditor

2. The relevant facts, as pleaded by the Operational Creditor, are that it was engaged in providing surveyor services. The Corporate Debtor issued tenders from time to time inviting bids from service providers. The Operational Creditor participated in the said tender process and was engaged for providing surveyor services in respect of four projects. Agreements were executed between the parties and work orders/letters of award were issued by the Corporate Debtor in favour of the Operational Creditor against the fee payable for such services.

3. It is the case of the Operational Creditor that it carried out the survey work and raised four bills dated 28.03.2022. The Corporate Debtor made certain payments against the said bills, not against any specific bill but by way of lump-sum payments, namely, Rs. 12,00,527 on 18.10.2022 and Rs. 9,08,871 on 09.02.2023. It is further stated that the Corporate Debtor also made payment of Rs. 18,82,354.78 towards GST.

4. The Operational Creditor further submits that the Corporate Debtor confirmed six bills vide email dated 21.11.2023. In all, the Operational Creditor claims to have issued eleven bills, as mentioned in Part IV of the Application. According to the Operational Creditor, there is no dispute in respect of the outstanding bills forming the basis of the present Application. The Operational Creditor issued a Demand Notice in Form-3 dated

31.07.2025, and thereafter filed the present petition.

2 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Submissions by Corporate Debtor

5. The Corporate Debtor, a Mini-Ratna Government of India Undertaking, has opposed the Application. It is submitted that the Operational Creditor is seeking to invoke the insolvency framework as a recovery mechanism for disputed contractual claims, which is impermissible under the Code. The Corporate Debtor has raised a preliminary objection as to maintainability on the ground that there existed a pre-existing dispute between the parties regarding performance of the contracts and recovery for incomplete work.

6. The Corporate Debtor relies upon Clause 4 of Annexure-B to the Agreement to contend that the Operational Creditor is not entitled to payment for defective and incomplete work. It is submitted that the Corporate Debtor had communicated with the Operational Creditor vide letters/emails dated 13.10.2023, 31.07.2024, 01.08.2024, 06.08.2024, 24.02.2025 and 27.05.2025 regarding unsatisfactory quality of deliverables. According to the Corporate Debtor, the