National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal Against NCLT Order on Pre-Existing Dispute. The dismissal was based on the finding that multiple disputes existed prior to the demand notice, justifying the rejection of the insolvency application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by Rattan Singh Builders Private Limited against Indorama Ventures Yarns Private Limited, challenging the NCLT's order dated 14.01.2026, which dismissed their application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant claimed an operational debt of Rs. 4,88,42,350/- due to unpaid certified Running Account (RA) Bills and retention money. The contract for civil construction work was awarded on 25.06.2022, with a total value of Rs. 49,46,75,441/-. The appellant alleged that the NCLT erred in treating disputes raised by the respondent as pre-existing, despite the debt being certified. The respondent countered that multiple disputes regarding delays, quality of work, and liquidated damages existed prior to the demand notice. The NCLT found that the disputes were bona fide and not mere sham defenses, leading to the dismissal of the application. The appellate tribunal upheld the NCLT's findings, noting that the appellant's own communications acknowledged ongoing disputes and incomplete work. The court emphasized that the certification of RA Bills did not equate to an admission of liability, as the quality and satisfaction remained with the respondent. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, affirming the existence of pre-existing disputes as a valid ground for rejecting the insolvency application.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Pre-Existing Dispute - Dismissal of Section 9 Application - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 - The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application on grounds of a bona fide pre-existing dispute between the parties, which was evidenced by multiple communications regarding delays and quality issues prior to the demand notice. Held that the existence of such disputes justified the dismissal of the application (Paras 31-36).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Section 9 application filed by the Appellant was rightly rejected on the ground of existence of a pre-existing dispute.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appellate tribunal upheld the NCLT's dismissal of the Section 9 application, affirming that pre-existing disputes justified the rejection of the insolvency proceedings.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • pre-existing dispute
  • operational debt
  • certification of bills
  • contractual obligations
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 69

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 453 of 2026

2026-05-06

Indevar Pandey

Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Mr. Naveen Sharma, Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Mr. Sidhartha Sharma, Mr. Arjun Asthana, Ms. Aakanksha Sahni

Rattan Singh Builders Private Limited

Indorama Ventures Yarns Private Limited

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of insolvency application

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought admission of Section 9 application for operational debt

Filing Reason

Claim of unpaid certified dues and retention money

Previous Decisions

NCLT dismissed the application on grounds of pre-existing disputes

Issues

Existence of pre-existing disputes Validity of the dismissal of the Section 9 application

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that certified bills constituted admission of debt. Respondent contended that multiple disputes existed prior to the demand notice.

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of bona fide pre-existing disputes negates the admission of an insolvency application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Judgment Excerpts

The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application on grounds of a bona fide pre-existing dispute. The certification of RA Bills did not equate to an admission of liability. The disputes were not vague but supported by specific factual assertions.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the NCLT's order dated 14.01.2026, which dismissed the Section 9 application.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 8, Section 9
  • Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996: Section 3
  • Indian Contract Act, 1872: Section 23
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Holds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Decide Amendment Application in Suit Slated for Transfer Due to Loss of Pecuniary Jurisdiction. The Court cannot retain jurisdiction to decide an amendment application seeking to increase suit valuatio...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Conviction in Border Security Force Case — Upholds Right of Private Defence. The court found that the appellant acted in self-defence when confronted by armed intruders, leading to a conviction for culpable homicide not amoun...