SURABHI ENTERPRISES PVT LTD Vs. RHD ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ld. Counsel for the operational creditor is present. No one is present from the corporate debtor's side. Petitioner has filed this petition u/s. 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I & B Code 2016) . It appears that operational creditor has served notice under section 8(1) of the I & B Code, 2016. Notice, which has been attached to the petition is at page 30, shows that the demand notice has been issued by Shri Bijayendra Mitra, Advocate but it is not mentioned whether he holds position with or in relation to the operational creditor.

(2.) As per law laid down by the Hon'ble NCLAT in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 39 of 2017 ( Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. DF Deutschwe Forfait AG & Anr.) notice can only be given by the person having authority to issue notice and holding position in the company.

(3.) Therefore, petition is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to file fresh petition after compliance of I & B Code, 2016.