Demand Notices sent u/s 8 of the Code to the registered address, and functional address of the Corporate Debtor met with the remarks ‘addressee moved' and 'unclaimed' respectively. Unclaimed, will also have to be treated as Service of Notice. Again, one set of Demand Notice was duly served upon one of the Directors of the Corporate Debtor. Thus, the Demand Notice was duly served on the functional address as well as Director of the Corporate Debtor.
Upon perusal of the record, it is apparent that the Demand Notice was duly served on the functional address as well as Director of the Corporate Debtor. The legislative intent of issuance of Demand Notice under Section 8(1) is not a mere formality but a mandatory provision.
Only after service of notice under Section 8(1) and on completion of 10 days, if payment towards the demand is not made, an Operational Creditor gets right to apply under Section 9 and not before such date.
Under Section 2(59) of the Companies Act, 2013 Director is included in to definition of Officer. Under Section 20 of the Act a document served on a Company or on Officer thereof is service recognized. Going from Principles of Natural Justice, in terms of Section 424 of Companies Act, 2013 read with above provision of Service of Notice on Director must be held to be good service.
In the case of Shubham Jain v. Gagan Ferrotech Limited and Another, REED 2021 NCLT Del 1363, the NCLAT New Delhi observed that the mandate u/s 8 of the Code was fulfilled, and the Adjudicating Authority has rightly admitted the application u/s 9 filed by the Operational Creditor for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor.