The Portfolio · BriefAll articles →
Insolvency

POLYCAB · Polycab India Limited · BSE · Filed 9 Oct · 2 min read

NCLT Admits Insolvency Petition Against Polycab; Company Appeals to NCLAT

The Ahmedabad bench admitted an aluminium-ingot supplier's Section 9 petition and initiated a resolution process against Polycab, which has appealed.

What the filing discloses

Polycab India told the BSE that the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, admitted an insolvency petition against the company on 7 October 2026 and initiated a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The petition was filed by Asier Metals Private Limited, described in the filing as an operational creditor, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, over a disputed operational debt arising from the supply of aluminium ingots.

The admission order appoints an Interim Resolution Professional and declares a moratorium under Section 14 of the Code. The company said it has filed an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), with a hearing scheduled on 9 October 2026 — the same date as this filing.

The underlying commercial dispute

Per the order, the claim relates to aluminium ingots supplied in June 2026 against two purchase orders dated 8 June 2026 and 25 June 2026, at a stated price per kg. Polycab contended that the invoices were marked "Provisional Billing" and remained subject to reconciliation, price adjustments, quantity discounts and detention/demurrage charges, and asserted counterclaims that it said exceeded the creditor's claim. The company argued the matter amounted to using the IBC as a recovery mechanism against a solvent debtor.

Applying the Supreme Court's test in Mobilox Innovations v. Kirusa Software, the Tribunal held that no legally sufficient pre-existing dispute had been established before the statutory demand notice, and that an operational debt was due and payable. It admitted the petition under Section 9(5).

The company's own materiality view

In response to exchange queries, Polycab noted that the alleged operational debt is below the materiality threshold under Regulation 30(4) of SEBI (LODR) Regulations for FY2026-27. The company stated that, given the size of the claim relative to that threshold, it did not expect a material impact on its financials or business operations, and that it had therefore not earlier disclosed the litigation to the exchanges.

Alleged operational debt
₹2.79 crore
Alleged operational debt (exact)
₹2,78,70,157.22
Purchase order price
₹405 per kg
Corporate Debtor counterclaim
₹17,52,85,712.31
IRP initial cost advance
₹5,00,000

A CIRP admission triggers a moratorium and places an Interim Resolution Professional over the company's affairs pending resolution — a significant procedural event for holders even where the disputed debt is small. The company has stated the claim is below its materiality threshold and has appealed to the NCLAT, so the outcome depends on that appeal.

Share this

The brief

You just read one filing on Polycab India. We do this every morning — for the stocks you own.

A calm, cited reading of your own holdings, delivered daily on Telegram or email. No tips.

Free during the pilot.

Read all articles