Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mobilox Innovations (supra) gave a very wide meaning to the term 'the existence of a dispute'. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that word 'and' appearing in clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 8 must be read as 'or' keeping in mind the legislative intent and the fact that anomalous situation would arise if it is not read as 'or'. By reading it as 'and' the bankruptcy cases would be stave off only where the cases are pending and the cases where dispute has arisen just few days back or where the limitation for filing cases is not over may be published in to insolvency process, though a dispute may exist. The code is designed in a manner that operational creditors with small debt are not able to push corporate debtor into premature insolvency resolution process it is enough that dispute exists between the parties.

5. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant projects an argument that the 'Adjudicating Authority' had committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the dispute raised in the Reply to the 'Demand Notice' is pre-existing one as per Section 8 of IBC. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant brings to the notice of this Tribunal that the 'Adjudicating Authority' had failed to apply the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd." reported in (2018) 1 SCC 353) and came to an erroneous conclusion that there existed a pre-existing dispute in the instant case.

APPELLANT'S CITATIONS:

16. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant relies on the Judgment of this Tribunal in "G.T. Polymers Vs. Keshava Medi Devices Pvt. Ltd." in Comp. Appl.

(AT)(Ins)1266 of 2019 reported in MANU/NL/0257/2020 wherein at paragraphs 10 & 15 it is observed as under:

10. "The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mobilox Innvations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kirussa Software Pvt. Ltd. 2017 1 SCC Online SC 353 held as to what are facts to be examined by the Adjudicating Authority while examining an Application under Section 9 of I & B Code which is as follows: -

If any one of the aforesaid conditions is lacking, the application would have to be rejected. Apart from the above, the adjudicating authority must follow the mandate of Section 9, as outlined above, and in particular the mandate of Section 9(5) of the Act, and admit or reject the Application, as the case may be, depending upon the factors mentioned in Section 9(5) of the Act."

15. "Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) held that what is the scope of ascertaining the existence of a dispute at the time of admitting the Application, which is as follows:-