Case Note & Summary
The appeals were filed by Aidem Ventures Pvt. Ltd. against a common judgment dated 13.02.2026 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) which rejected the petitions under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant had entered into agreements with three companies for advertising representation and claimed unpaid commissions totaling Rs. 75,49,740. Following the enactment of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the High Court of Delhi transferred the winding-up proceedings to the NCLT. The NCLT dismissed the petitions on the grounds of a pre-existing dispute and failure to meet the threshold requirement of Rs. 1 Crore as stipulated by the Code. The respondent's counsel argued that the petitions were not maintainable under the amended Section 4 of the Code, while the appellant's counsel contended that the threshold applicable at the time of filing the winding-up petition should apply. The court analyzed the legal provisions and precedents, ultimately agreeing with the respondent's position that the petitions did not meet the necessary threshold for admission under the Code. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the NCLT's decision without costs.
Headnote
A) Insolvency Law - Maintainability of Petitions - Threshold Requirements - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 4 - The court held that the petitions filed by the appellant did not meet the threshold of Rs. 1 Crore as required under the amended provisions of the Code at the time of transfer, leading to their dismissal. (Paras 28-29).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitions filed by the appellant before the NCLT met the threshold requirements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Final Decision
The appeals were dismissed as the petitions filed by the appellant did not meet the threshold of Rs. 1 Crore at the time of transfer to the NCLT, rendering them not maintainable.
Law Points
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
- 2016
- Companies Act
- 2013
- maintainability of petitions
- threshold limit
- pre-existing dispute
Case Details
2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 6
CA (AT) (Ins) Nos. 782, 783, 784 of 2026
Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Naresh Salecha
Mr. Kunal Tandon, Mr. Deepak Joshi, Mr. Rudra Pratap, Ms. Natasha Singh, Mr. P. Nagesh, Mr. Shaurya Aditya, Mr. Deepak Shukla, Mr. Alok Singh, Ms. Radhika Choubey, Ms. Geetu Bishnoi
Skyline Radio Network Ltd., E24 Glamour Ltd., News 24 Broadcast India Ltd.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeals against the dismissal of petitions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Remedy Sought
Aidem Ventures Pvt. Ltd. sought to have the NCLT's dismissal of their petitions overturned.
Filing Reason
The appellant claimed unpaid commissions from the corporate debtors.
Previous Decisions
The NCLT dismissed the petitions on grounds of pre-existing dispute and failure to meet the threshold.
Issues
Whether the petitions met the threshold requirements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Whether the NCLT's dismissal of the petitions was justified.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the threshold applicable at the time of filing the winding-up petition should apply.
The respondent contended that the petitions did not meet the threshold of Rs. 1 Crore as required under the amended provisions of the Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the petitions must meet the threshold requirements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and that the NCLT is required to assess the maintainability of such petitions based on the provisions of the Code.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitions filed by the appellant did not meet the threshold of Rs. 1 Crore as required under the amended provisions of the Code at the time of transfer, leading to their dismissal.
We do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment as the petitions filed by the appellant before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority were not meeting the threshold at the time of transfer of petition to NCLT.
Procedural History
The appellant filed petitions under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which were dismissed by the NCLT. The appellant then appealed to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal against this dismissal.
Acts & Sections
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 4, Section 9
- Companies Act, 2013: Section 434
- Companies Act, 1956: Section 433, Section 434
