Chandigarh Overseas Pvt. Ltd.

High Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain prayers with respect to debt assignment deed which is a subject matter of proceedings before NCLT/NCLAT | Jurisdiction vested in NCLT while dealing with a resolution plan is of wide ambit and any question of law or fact in relation to insolvency resolution has to be determined by NCLT – Tejinder Pal Setia v. Kone Elevators India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. – Delhi High Court

Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that:
(i) As such, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the prayers of the plaintiff with respect to the assignment deed dated 03.02.2023, which is the fulcrum of the present suit.
(ii) Sections 63 and 231 IBC create a bar on the jurisdiction of the civil court in respect of any matter in which the NCLT and NCLAT has jurisdiction under the IBC and the adjudicating authority under the Code is competent to pass any order.
(iii) The jurisdiction vested in NCLT while dealing with a resolution plan is of wide ambit and any question of law or fact in relation to the insolvency resolution has to be determined by the NCLT.

High Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain prayers with respect to debt assignment deed which is a subject matter of proceedings before NCLT/NCLAT | Jurisdiction vested in NCLT while dealing with a resolution plan is of wide ambit and any question of law or fact in relation to insolvency resolution has to be determined by NCLT – Tejinder Pal Setia v. Kone Elevators India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Whether it is the discretion of Operational Creditor or the nature of the Operational Debt, that determines the issuance of Demand Notice in Form-3 or Form-4 under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016? – Tejinder Pal Setia Vs. Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT held that the Operational Creditor is at liberty to submit Demand Notice either in Form-3 or Form-4. When Notice is issued in Form-4, copy of the Invoice is required to be attached with the Notice. The Demand Notice issued by the Operational Creditor was in Form-3, hence, no infirmity can be found in the Demand Notice, if invoices were not attached. In the present case, the basis of the Demand Notice was Supply Agreement and acknowledgement letter issued by the Corporate Debtor. No invoices were referred to in the Demand Notice. Hence, submission of the Appellant that Demand Notice should have been accompanied with the invoices cannot be accepted.

Whether it is the discretion of Operational Creditor or the nature of the Operational Debt, that determines the issuance of Demand Notice in Form-3 or Form-4 under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016? – Tejinder Pal Setia Vs. Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top