India: Interpretation Of The Word 'Dispute', And The Phrase 'Notice Of Dispute', Under The Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Last Updated: 4 September 2017
Article by Singh & Associates

Prior to the enactment of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Hereinafter referred to as "Code"), there was no consolidated law in India, that dealt with insolvency and bankruptcy. The primary objective behind the enactment was to consolidate and amend the laws related to the reorganization and the insolvency resolution of corporate persons, firms and individuals in a time bound manner. However, as it exists, the Code is still in a very nascent stage of its operation, and on the perusal of the entire scheme of the Code, while it is clearly evident that time is of the essence for the entire insolvency resolution process, it is no less important that the Code is interpreted in a manner keeping in mind the mischief it seeks to rectify. In this regard, recent judgments passed by different benches of the NCLT gave rise to controversies surrounding the interpretation of the provisions of the Code.

Unlike a financial creditor who may directly file an application before the NCLT, the operational creditor has to comply with the requirements of Section 8 of the Code, wherein the operational creditor has to deliver a demand notice or a copy of an invoice to the corporate debtor for the amount of the unpaid operational debt in respect of which the default has occurred. Subsection (2) of Section 8 provides a 10-day window to the corporate debtor to either repay such unpaid amount as stated in the demand notice, or, bring to the notice of the operational creditor an existence of a dispute if any, and record of the pendency of the suit or arbitration proceedings filed before the receipt of such notice or invoice in relation to such dispute. In case payment has already been made, the corporate debtor has to send back the proof of such payment to the operational creditor. So basically, what the operational creditor receives is either payment or a 'notice of dispute'.

This is the question that had arisen before various NCLT's that whether a corporate debtor can raise all kinds of disputes underthe notice of dispute or can the notice of dispute only refer to pendency of a suit or an arbitration pending before the receipt of the demand notice under section 8 of the Code. Subsequently conflicting interpretations as to what constitutes a 'dispute' had arisen. The phrase "existence of disputes" assumes significance as it is largely the only legal defense that a corporate debtor can take to avoid insolvency/liquidation proceedings initiated by an operational creditor. The survival of the corporate debtor therefore to a large extent depends on whether there exists a dispute concerning the claims of the operational creditor because the Code empowers the Tribunal to either admit or reject the operational creditor's insolvency application based on whether or not a notice of dispute (in existence) has been received by such operational creditor from the corporate debtor.


The Principal Bench, of NCLT, New Delhi, interpreted the term "dispute" in two of its decisions, namely, in One Coast Plaster v. Ambience Private Limited1 and in Philips India Limited v. Goodwill Hospital and Research Centre Limited2. Both applications were filed under Section 9 of the Code by operational creditors of corporate debtors. The Principal Bench vide its separate orders dated March 1, 2017 rejected both applications on the common ground that the concerned corporate debtors in both matters had issued their "notice of dispute" in response to the applicant:s demand notice, and therefore, as per Section 9(5)(ii)(d) of the Code, the tribunal was liable to reject the applications. The Principal Bench, while interpreting the term ≪dispute≫ as defined in Section 5(6) of the Code, observed that the said definition was inclusive and not exhaustive considering the use of the expression ≪includes≫ which immediately succeeds the word ≪dispute.≫ Therefore, the bench was of the view that the legislature intended to give wider connotations to the said term ≪dispute≫ and it cannot be restrictively interpreted to mean a pending suit or an arbitration proceeding in relation to a debt, quality goods/service, or breach of any contractual representation/warranty. From the abovementioned decisions of the Principal Bench it was inferred that as long as a corporate debtor brings to the notice of the applicant the existence of a "dispute" within 10 days of the receipt of the demand notice or copy of the invoice issued by the applicant (or even thereafter)3, the application for corporate insolvency of such corporate debtor is liable to be rejected by the tribunal, unless the said "dispute" can be dislodged on the basis of the evidence submitted by an application.

However, in complete contrast to the abovementioned decisions of the NCLT Principal Bench, Delhi, the learned NCLT Mumbai Bench while deciding a factually similar application filed by an operational creditor in Essar Projects India Limited v. MCL Global Street Private Limited ruled that since the "dispute" raised by the concerned corporate debtor under its reply to the demand notice of the applicant was not raised before any court of law till the receipt of such notice, such "dispute" cannot be treated as a "dispute in existence" at the time of receipt of the demand notice. The learned tribunal under its order dated March 6, 2017 noted that the corporate debtor had never raised any question on the invoices issued by the applicant creditors and rather admitted the same. Therefore, a simple denial of claim by the corporate debtor on grounds not raised previously and only pursuant to the receipt of a demand notice under Section 8(1) of the Code will not amount to a "dispute in existence" as required under Section 8(2)(a) of the Code. Therefore, the NCLT Mumbai Bench interpreted the term "dispute" in light of the statutory mandate provided under Section 8(2)(a) of the Code, i.e., upon receipt of a demand notice/invoice under Section 8(1), a corporate debtor must bring to the notice of the applicant creditor the "existence of a dispute" and any record of proceedings filed in relation thereto before the receipt of such demand notice/ invoice.


Recently the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, ("NCLAT") in its order dated May 24, 2017, in the matter of Kirusa Software Pvt Ltd vs Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd3., has now put to rest the controversy as to what would mean dispute and existence of dispute for the purpose of determination of an application under section 9 of the IBC.

The NCLAT drew an interpretational analogy between section 8 and 9 of the IBC and Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, wherein the judicial authority is required to prima facie determine the existence of an arbitration agreement before it can exercise jurisdiction in relation to a dispute brought before it. The court opined that, "Though the words 'prima facie' are missing in Sections 8 and 9 of the Code, yet the Adjudicating Authority would examine whether notice of dispute in fact raises the dispute and that too within the parameters of two definitions - 'debt' and 'default' and then it has to reject the application if it apparently finds that the notice of dispute does really raise a dispute and no other factual ascertainment is required. On the other hand, if the Adjudicating Authority finds that the notice of dispute lacks in particulars or does not raise a dispute, it may admit the application but in either case, there is neither an ascertainment of the dispute, nor satisfaction of the Adjudicating Authority." It held that the intent of the Legislature, was clearly evident from the definition of the term "dispute". If the intent of the Legislature was that a demand by an operational creditor can be disputed only by showing a record of suit or arbitration proceeding, the definition of "dispute" it would have simply said 'dispute means a dispute pending in arbitration or suit'. Thus, the legislature wanted the same to be illustrative and not exhaustive. Further it also held that Section 8(2) of the IBC cannot be read to mean that a dispute must be pending between the parties prior to the notice of demand and that too in arbitration or a civil court and that even a dispute concerning execution of a judgment or decree passed in a suit or award passed by an arbitral tribunal can be used to prove a dispute under the IBC. The 'dispute' must be raised by the corporate debtor prior to the notice for insolvency resolution by an operational creditor under section 8 of the IBC. However it has to be noted that the raising of a pending 'dispute' by the corporate debtor cannot be done with a mala fide intention to only stall the insolvency resolution process.

It emerges both from the object and purpose of the IBC and the context in which the expression is used, that disputes raised in the notice sent by the corporate debtor to the operational creditor would be covered within sub-section (2) of Section 8 of the IBC. Applying the aforementioned principles, the NCLAT came to the conclusion that in the instant case, the defense raised for dispute by the operational debtor was vague and motivated to evade liability.


Based on the law laid down in the Kirusa case, it can be safely concluded that the definition of "dispute" is "inclusive" and not "exhaustive". The same has to be given wide meaning provided it is relatable to the existence of the amount of the debt, quality of goods or service or breach of a representation or warranty. Once the term "dispute" is given its natural and ordinary meaning, upon reading of the Code as a whole, the width of "dispute" has to be taken to cover all disputes on debt, default irrespective of the fact that whether there were any pending proceedings or not in front of a court or an arbitral tribunal. Thereby it would be incorrect to construe the word "dispute" in such a way that it limits the interpretation to the extent that only two ways of disputing a demand can be made by the corporate debtor, i.e. either by showing a record of pending suit or by showing a record of a pending arbitration.

Further in the very recent case of, "Penugonda Satish Babu vs. Amarpali Biotech India4" decided on 10/07/2017 before the principal bench of the NCLT at New Delhi, a similar issue was raised before the tribunal. In the aforementioned case, upon the service of the notice of the corporate insolvency proceedings against the corporate debtor, the corporate debtor was given an opportunity to file their reply wherein it was claimed that the creditor had violated several clauses of the agreement signed between them and had failed to discharge its obligations under the said agreement. The corporate debtor also went on to allege that the claim amounts remain totally unsubstantiated and thereby the claims are being vehemently disputed. The debtor argued that in view of the arbitration clause contained in the agreement and a bona fide dispute of the accounts of the parties, the remedy has to be sought elsewhere.

The tribunal after going through the arguments from both the parties held that it was quite evident that the disputes arose from the contractual relationship that the parties were in, and the subsequent transactions arising out of it. The tribunal, while dismissing the petition agreed with the contention of the Corporate Debtor that there was a bona fide dispute between the parties, and held that it would not be appropriate for the tribunal to go into the merits of it since there is a very limited period available for the disposal of such claims. The tribunal held that the Operational Creditor is free to seek any other remedy that may be available to him under law. This case is important as it follows the rationale laid down in the Kirusa case, that it is not mandatory for pending proceedings to exist in order to come under the purview of the word "dispute". Since in this case, clearly there was no pending arbitral proceeding or any proceeding before any civil court and yet the tribunal held that the dispute raised was bonafide in nature.


1 Company Application No. (I.B.) 07/PB/2017

2 Company Application No. (I.B.) 03/PB/2017

3 MANU/NL/0027/2017

4 C.P. No. (IB)-58/(PB)/2017

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions