NCLT Lawyers in Ahmedabad: Insolvency & Bankruptcy (IBC) Representation Across India
NCLT Lawyers in Ahmedabad: Insolvency, IBC and Corporate Debtor Representation
R & D Law Chambers LLP Practice is led by Ravish Bhatt | Advocate, Bar Council of Gujarat (G/504/2008) | Dual-qualified lawyer (India and England and Wales) | Solicitor of England and Wales (non-practising), SRA Registration No. 492 477 | ADIT, Chartered Institute of Taxation, London Published: 26 October 2026 | Last reviewed: 26 October 2026 |
Jump to Section:
What does the firm do before the NCLT at Ahmedabad?
When does the firm file under Section 7, and when under Section 9?
How does the firm defend a company against a Section 7 or Section 9 petition?
What happens once a company is admitted, and how long does it run?
What changed in 2026, and what has not commenced?
When is the NCLT the wrong forum, and where does an appeal go?
Situations these sections cover
Frequently asked questions
Related pages and articles
In brief: R & D Law Chambers LLP is an Ahmedabad law firm whose advocates appear before the National Company Law Tribunal at Ahmedabad. The firm acts for operating companies on both sides of an insolvency petition, under Section 7 and Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, through the resolution process, and on appeal to the NCLAT. |
What does the firm do before the NCLT at Ahmedabad?
In brief: The firm files and defends petitions under Sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, represents companies through the resolution process, and appears in appeals before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. |
Who the firm acts for
The firm acts for operating companies. That includes a company owed money under a contract, which is an operational creditor; a company that has lent money, subscribed to debentures or placed an inter-corporate deposit, which is a financial creditor; and a company defending a petition brought against it, which is the corporate debtor. The same advocates appear on either side of a petition.
Which companies fall within the Ahmedabad bench
The National Company Law Tribunal bench at Ahmedabad exercises jurisdiction over companies whose registered office is situated in Gujarat, and the territory notified with it. The registered office, not the place of business and not the place where the debt arose, fixes the bench.
The threshold
Section 4 of the Code sets the minimum amount of default at one lakh rupees, and its proviso allows the Central Government to specify a higher figure by notification, capped at one crore rupees. By notification S.O. 1205(E) dated 24 March 2020 the Central Government specified one crore rupees. A default below that figure is not taken to the Tribunal, and the firm advises on the recovery routes that remain.
When does the firm file under Section 7, and when under Section 9?
In brief: Section 7 is for a financial creditor and Section 9 for an operational creditor. The route is fixed by the character of the debt, not by preference. Section 9 requires a demand notice first and is defeated by a genuine pre-existing dispute. Section 7 requires neither. |
Section 7 | Section 9 | |
Who files | A financial creditor: a company that has lent, subscribed to debentures or placed an inter-corporate deposit | An operational creditor: a company owed for goods, services, employment or statutory dues |
Notice before filing | None required | A demand notice under Section 8, with ten days for the corporate debtor to reply |
Effect of a dispute | Not a bar in itself; the debtor shows the debt is not due | A genuine pre-existing dispute defeats the petition |
What the Tribunal looks for | Whether a default has occurred | Default, delivery of the notice, and the absence of a dispute |
Order period | Fourteen days under Section 7(5), with reasons recorded for any delay | Fourteen days under Section 9(5), with reasons recorded for any delay |
The character of the debt decides the section. A sum owed under a supply contract does not become a financial debt because the supplier would rather avoid a demand notice. Mischaracterisation is a common reason a petition fails at the threshold, and it is the first thing the firm tests on a defence.
How does the firm defend a company against a Section 7 or Section 9 petition?
In brief: Against a Section 9 petition the defence is usually a genuine pre-existing dispute, raised in reply to the Section 8 demand notice. Against a Section 7 petition the defence is that no default has occurred, because the debt is not due in law or in fact. |
Replying to the Section 8 demand notice
Section 8(2) gives the corporate debtor ten days from receipt of the demand notice to bring the existence of a dispute to the operational creditor’s notice, or to show that the debt has been paid. That reply is the single most important document in the defence, because a dispute first raised after the petition is filed carries far less weight than one already on the record. The firm settles the reply against the contract, the correspondence and any pending proceeding.
What counts as a pre-existing dispute
In Mobilox Innovations Private Limited v Kirusa Software Private Limited, (2018) 1 SCC 353, the Supreme Court held at paragraph 40 that the adjudicating authority is to see “whether there is a plausible contention which requires further investigation” and that it does not examine the merits. The Court concluded: “So long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudicating authority has to reject the application.” The defence therefore does not have to win the dispute. It has to show the dispute is real.
Defending a Section 7 petition
In Innoventive Industries Limited v ICICI Bank, (2018) 1 SCC 407, the Supreme Court held that “it is at the stage of Section 7(5), where the adjudicating authority is to be satisfied that a default has occurred, that the corporate debtor is entitled to point out that a default has not occurred in the sense that the ‘debt’, which may also include a disputed claim, is not due. A debt may not be due if it is not payable in law or in fact.” Limitation is part of that. Section 238A applies the Limitation Act, 1963 to applications under the Code, and in B.K. Educational Services Private Limited v Parag Gupta and Associates, Civil Appeal No. 23988 of 2017 decided on 11 October 2018, the Supreme Court held that time runs from the date of default. An acknowledgement of the debt in the balance sheet may extend it, as Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v Bishal Jaiswal holds.
What the 2026 amendment now puts on a debtor
Explanation II inserted into Section 7 provides that a record of default for a financial debt held with an information utility, furnished with a financial institution’s application, is sufficient to establish default. Explanation I provides that where the admission requirements are met, no other ground may be used to reject the application. A debtor facing such a record has to attack the record itself or show the debt is not due, and generalised denials no longer serve.
What happens once a company is admitted, and how long does it run?
In brief: Admission triggers a moratorium, displaces the board and vests management in an insolvency professional. The process is to be completed in one hundred and eighty days, extendable once by up to ninety days, within an outer limit of three hundred and thirty days. |
Stage | Period | Source |
Order on a Section 7 or Section 9 application | Fourteen days, reasons recorded for any delay | Sections 7(5) and 9(5) as amended in 2026 |
Corporate insolvency resolution process | One hundred and eighty days from admission | Section 12(1) |
Extension | Up to ninety days, once only | Section 12(3) |
Outer limit including time taken in legal proceedings | Three hundred and thirty days | Proviso to Section 12(3) |
Withdrawal of an admitted application | Order within thirty days | Section 12A as substituted in 2026 |
Appeal to the NCLAT | Thirty days, extendable by fifteen on sufficient cause | Section 61(2) |
Moratorium, committee and plan
The moratorium under Section 14 stays suits, execution and enforcement against the corporate debtor. A committee of creditors is constituted, and its decisions on a resolution plan are matters of commercial wisdom which the Tribunal does not sit in appeal over, as Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited v Satish Kumar Gupta establishes. The firm represents companies in the committee, in objections to a plan, and in applications arising during the process.
What approval of a plan does to old claims
In Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, decided on 13 April 2021, the Supreme Court explained that the legislative intent is “to freeze all the claims so that the resolution applicant starts on a clean slate and is not flung with any surprise claims”. The 2026 amendment has since written that into Section 31 itself, which now extinguishes claims arising before approval unless the plan provides otherwise. A creditor who sits out the process loses the claim, which is why the firm files claims early and in form.
What changed in 2026, and what has not commenced?
In brief: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026 received assent on 6 April 2026 and specified provisions came into force on 26 May 2026. The creditor-initiated process that much commentary describes is not among them and is not available. |
Provision | Position | In force |
Section 7(5): fourteen days to admit or reject, seven day notice to rectify defects, Explanations I and II | Amended | Yes, 26 May 2026 |
Section 9(5): reasons in writing where no order within fourteen days | Amended | Yes, 26 May 2026 |
Section 12A: withdrawal on the resolution professional’s application, ninety per cent of the committee’s voting share, barred before the committee is constituted and after the first invitation for resolution plans, order in thirty days | Substituted | Yes, 26 May 2026 |
Section 61(6): the NCLAT to dispose of an appeal within three months | Inserted | Yes, 26 May 2026 |
Chapter IV-A, Sections 58A to 58K: creditor-initiated insolvency resolution process | Enacted | No. Section 40 of the Amendment Act is absent from the commencement notification |
The commencement is by Ministry of Corporate Affairs notification S.O. 2625(E) dated 22 May 2026, issued under sub-section (2) of section 1 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026. The withdrawal change matters most in practice. A company that expected to settle after admission now has two hard bars: nothing can be withdrawn before the committee is constituted, and nothing after the first invitation for resolution plans has gone out. Settlement, if it is wanted, is a decision taken early or not at all.
When is the NCLT the wrong forum, and where does an appeal go?
In brief: The Code is a resolution process, not a recovery mechanism. Where the object is to recover a sum rather than to resolve insolvency, a suit, a commercial court proceeding or arbitration is the forum. An appeal from the Tribunal lies to the NCLAT within thirty days. |
A petition filed to apply pressure rather than to resolve insolvency is liable to be dismissed, and the firm says so before it files. Where the debt is disputed on the merits, where the amount falls below one crore rupees, or where the contract carries an arbitration clause, the route lies elsewhere: a commercial suit, covered on the firm’s commercial litigation page, or arbitration. Section 14 does not stay proceedings against directors or guarantors in their personal capacity.
An appeal from an order of the Tribunal lies to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal under Section 61 within thirty days, extendable by fifteen days on sufficient cause and no further. The Appellate Tribunal is now required to dispose of the appeal within three months. A further appeal lies to the Supreme Court under Section 62. A writ against an order of the Tribunal is entertained only exceptionally, and the firm’s Gujarat High Court page sets out when.
Situations these sections cover
In brief: The following illustrate the sections above. They are not accounts of particular matters. |
A demand notice arrives and the contract is already in dispute
A supplier serves a Section 8 demand notice for unpaid invoices. The company has written twice about defective supply and has withheld payment on that basis. The firm settles the reply within the ten day period, putting the correspondence and the contractual basis on the record so the dispute is pre-existing on the face of it.
An operational creditor wants to file and the debt is partly disputed
A company is owed across several invoices, some acknowledged and some contested. The firm advises that a petition covering the contested invoices invites a dispute defence to the whole, and confines the petition to the admitted amount where that clears one crore rupees.
Settlement is wanted after the committee has been constituted
An admitted company reaches terms with the petitioning creditor. Because the committee of creditors has been constituted, Section 12A as substituted requires ninety per cent of its voting share, and withdrawal is barred altogether once the first invitation for resolution plans has issued. The firm advises on timing before the window closes.
A record of default is produced from an information utility
A petition under Section 7 is supported by an information utility record filed with a financial institution’s application. Explanation II makes that sufficient to establish default. The firm examines how the record was created and authenticated, and whether the debt is due in law, rather than denying the default in general terms.
Frequently asked questions
What is the minimum default to file an NCLT case?
One crore rupees. Section 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 sets one lakh rupees and allows the Central Government to specify a higher figure capped at one crore, which it did by notification S.O. 1205(E) dated 24 March 2020.
Which companies fall under NCLT Ahmedabad?
Companies whose registered office is in Gujarat, and the territory notified with it. The place of business and the place where the debt arose do not decide the bench.
How long does a CIRP take?
One hundred and eighty days from admission under Section 12(1), extendable once by up to ninety days, with an outer limit of three hundred and thirty days that includes time taken in legal proceedings.
What is the difference between going to the NCLT and going to a civil or commercial court?
The Code resolves insolvency and is not a recovery mechanism. A court or an arbitral tribunal decides what is owed between two parties. Where the debt is genuinely disputed, or falls below one crore rupees, the court or the arbitration route applies.
Can an admitted insolvency case be withdrawn?
Only within limits. Section 12A as substituted in 2026 requires the resolution professional to apply with ninety per cent of the committee’s voting share, bars withdrawal before the committee is constituted, and bars it after the first invitation for resolution plans.
How long do I have to appeal against an NCLT order?
Thirty days to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal under Section 61(2), extendable by fifteen days on sufficient cause and no further.
Is the creditor-initiated insolvency process available yet?
No. Chapter IV-A was enacted by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026, but section 40 of that Act is not in the commencement notification of 22 May 2026, so the process has not come into force.
Related pages and articles
Our related services
Commercial litigation and dispute resolution: The route where a debt is disputed on the merits or falls below the threshold.
Arbitration: Where the contract carries an arbitration clause.
Gujarat High Court: Writs and appeals above the Tribunal.
Economic offences: Proceedings against directors and officers alongside insolvency.
Contract drafting: Where operational debt and its disputes originate.
Criminal law: Complaints that run beside a commercial default.
Related research and articles by R & D Law Chambers
How to recover unpaid invoices from an Indian company: The options open to a domestic or foreign creditor, including the Section 9 route.
Challenging cognizance taken without the inquiry a statute requires: The ground on which proceedings against directors are quashed.
Disclaimer: This page is intended solely for informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 turn on statutory thresholds, limitation periods, commencement notifications and judicial decisions that must be assessed against each specific set of facts. Nothing on this page should be relied upon as a substitute for specific professional guidance. Ravish Bhatt is enrolled as an Advocate with the Bar Council of Gujarat and is a non-practising Solicitor of England and Wales. |