NCLAT Set Aside Nike India's Plea To Initiate Insolvency Against Its Dealer

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on Monday dismissed a petition filed by India to initiate insolvency proceedings against one of its dealers.

A two-member bench upheld the orders of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which on December 22, 2022, rejected the footwear and apparel maker's plea to initiate the insolvency proceedings against its distributor on the ground of pre-existing dispute.

The appellate tribunal further said it was "not satisfied with the submission of the Appellant ( India) that dispute is a moonshine dispute."

However, the said India is free to take recourse to the mechanism as provided in the Distributorship Agreement for realisation of its dues.

Nike India, an operational creditor had issued a notice under section 8 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) claiming an amount of Rs 3.15 crore.

In its reply, Nike India's claim was disputed by Enkay Brand Distribution.

On this, Nike India said it was a "moonshine" since in the distributorship Agreement between the parties, there was no liability which could have been fastened on the ground of sale on a lower price by the Corporate Debtor (distributor) and further under the agreement between the parties, Distributorship Agreement, no claim could have been raised.

However, after going through the reply, the said it raises issues pertaining to a pre-existing dispute between the parties.

It further said the distributorship agreement between parties is not disputed and Nike India has claims against the Corporate Debtor.

"Appellant is free to take recourse to the mechanism as provided in the Distributorship Agreement for the realisation of its dues," it said.

NCLAT further said that the present matter is not a case, where Section 9 (insolvency) proceedings under I&B Code can be initiated when a dispute is raised in reply to the Section 8 notice.

"We, thus, are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in dismissing the Section 9 application. The appeal is dismissed," said NCLAT.

Under section 8, an operational creditor, on the occurrence of a default, sends a demand notice of unpaid debt to the corporate debtor. IBC says corporate debtors shall reply within a period of ten days of the receipt of the demand notice.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

RECENT NEWS

JPMorgan's Berlin Moment: Chase Takes On Europe

There is something quietly symbolic about JPMorgan Chase choosing Berlin as its gateway into continental Europe. In a fo... Read more

What Strategy's Bitcoin Sale Really Tells Us

There is a moment in every bull run when the narrative starts to fray. Not with a crash, not with a scandal, but with so... Read more

Coutts Sets Scope On New Continent

Coutts steps into private marketsCoutts, the private bank best known for serving Britain’s wealthiest families and the... Read more

From Cypherpunk To Citadel

How Crypto Moved from the Wild West to the Mainstream Financial SystemA long-form analysis of Bitcoin's journey from fri... Read more

ACB Securities: Building Scale, Trust & Innovation

ACB Securities: Building Scale, Trust and Innovation in Vietnam’s Capital MarketsACB Securities (ACBS) is emerging as ... Read more

War Risk Returns To Markets As VIX Surges

For most of the past year, global markets behaved as though geopolitical risk had largely disappeared. Inflation was eas... Read more