Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Having its registered office at: Vidyut Nagar, P.O. DLW, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221004. ...Respondent Present For Appellant: Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Gaurav H. Sethi, Mr. Akash Chatterjee, Mr. Deeptanshu Chandra and Mr. Rahul Pawar, Advocates. For Respondent: None being Exparte. JUDGEMENT (23.04.2024) NARESH SALECHA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) 1. The present Appeal has been filed by SRV Techno Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (in short Appellant) under Section 61 of the Insolvency & 2 Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1651 of 2023 Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'Code') in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1651 of 2023 against the Impugned Order dated 12.10.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Prayagraj (in short 'Adjudicating Authority') in CP (IB) No. 486/ALD/2019. 2. Heard Counsel for the Appellant as the Respondent never participated in the proceedings. In this connection, it is noted that in the first order sheet dated 18.12.2023, no one had appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Similar position persisted on 06.02.2024 and since then the Respondent did not appear even on 15.03.2024, therefore it was decided to proceed exparte against the Respondent and the matter was listed for hearing on exparte basis on 08.04.2024 and on the same date the order was reserved. 3. It is noted that petition was filed by the Appellant under Section 9 of the Code against the Respondent for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short 'CIRP') for amount of Rs. 4,43,42,607/ inclusive of interest on the date of filing of petition before the Adjudicating Authority on 31.08.2019. 4. The Appellant is involved in business of supply of electrical equipment, components, servicing and providing allied services thereof, whereas the Respondent is the company engaged in distribution of electric power in Eastern area of Uttar Pradesh. 5. Shorn of unnecessary details, it is suffice to note that the Appellant got awarded two tenders by the Respondent for work of system improvement, 3 Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1651 of 2023 strengthening and augmentation for bringing down Aggregate Technical and Commercial ( in short 'AT&C') losses and to improve consumer supply under two different projects, namely, Kopaganj (as first project) with revised Bill of Quantities (in short 'BOQ') with the value of work at Rs. 7,37,93,117/ along with another project called Ghoshi Project (second project) with revised BOQ of Rs. 6,72,24,729/. 6. The Kopaganj Project was awarded through Letter of Intent (in short 'LOI') dated 03.03.2016 issued by the Respondent in favour of the Appellant and for Ghosi Project the LOI was issued on 27.04.2016 by the Respondent to the Appellant. 7. It has been pointed out that approval for the BOQ revision of both the projects was granted by the Managing Direction of the Respondent along with Director (Technical), Chief Engineer and Superintending Engineer and thereafter the revision approved BOQ for the first project stood at Rs. 7,37,93,117/ as for second revised project stood as approved to Rs. 6,72,24,729/. 8. The Appellant claimed that he successfully completed the entire project and submitted a completion report to the CEO of the projects which was accepted by the Superintending Engineer of Mau and Managing Director (in short 'MD') of the Respondent, both signed meaning acceptance of work's completion and accordingly completion certificate dated 23.12.2017 was issued by the 4 Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1651 of 2023 Superintending Engineer confirming the successful completion of both the projects by the Appellant for the value indicated in completion certificate. 9. The Appellant submitted that for Kopaganj Project, the App