The NCLAT Delhi Principal Bench on March 10, 2022, in the case of M/S Brand Realty Services Ltd. v. M/S Sir John Bakeries India Pvt. Ltd observed:

“The mere fact that Reply to notice under Section 8 (1) having not been given within 10 days or no reply to demand notice having been filed by the Corporate Debtor does not preclude the Corporate Debtor to bring relevant materials before the Adjudicating Authority to establish that there is a pre-existing dispute which may lead to the rejection of Section 9 application.”

The Tribunal further observed that the Section 8(2) of IBC when read with Section 9(1) of IBC, it is clear that Section 9(1) of IBC enables the Operational Creditor to file Section 9 application if no payment has been received by the Operational Creditor from Corporate Debtor or no notice of the dispute under sub-section (2) of section 8 of IBC has been received. The statutory scheme under Section 8 and 9 of IBC does not indicate that in an event reply to notice is not filed within 10 days by Corporate Debtor or no reply to notice under Section 8(1) of IBC have been given, the Corporate Debtor is precluded from raising the question of dispute.