NCLT Rejects Shikhar Dhawan’s Insolvency Plea Against Legends League Operator

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Delhi Bench has dismissed an insolvency application filed by Indian cricketer Shikhar Dhawan against Absolute Legends Sports Private Limited, holding that the applicant failed to establish the existence of a clear and due operational debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Bench comprising Manni Sankariah Shanmuga Sundaram (Judicial Member) and Atul Chaturvedi (Technical Member) observed that inconsistencies in the contractual documents and lack of proof regarding performance of obligations created serious doubts about the claimed liability, rendering the insolvency petition not maintainable under Section 9 of the IBC. The insolvency petition was filed by Dhawan as an Operational Creditor, seeking initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Absolute Legends Sports Pvt. Ltd., the entity that owns and operates the Legends League Cricket (LLC) tournament. Dhawan alleged that the company had defaulted in paying his player fee for participation in the third season of the Legends League Cricket tournament held between September and October 2024. According to the plea a Player Agreement dated 10 September 2024 was executed between the parties. The agreement provided for a player fee of ₹2.65 crore for Dhawan’s participation. The amount was to be paid in three instalments linked to the execution of the agreement, commencement of the league, and conclusion of the tournament. Dhawan stated that he raised an invoice for the full amount on 7 September 2024. However, he received only ₹1.51 crore in five tranches, leaving an alleged outstanding principal of ₹1.13 crore. Including interest calculated at 19.15% per annum, the total claim stood at ₹1.24 crore as of 30 April 2025. The cricketer issued a demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC on 8 May 2025 seeking payment of the outstanding amount. The corporate debtor allegedly responded by acknowledging the dues and promising payment within two weeks but failed to honour the commitment. Following the continued non-payment, Dhawan filed a petition under Section 9 of the IBC seeking insolvency proceedings against the company. After examining the agreement and supporting documents, the NCLT identified several issues that undermined the claim of an operational debt. The Tribunal noted that the agreement relied upon by the applicant raised serious concerns regarding its execution and structure. While the document bore a stamp dated 10 September 2024, it did not clearly specify the date of execution, and the signature of the franchise holder was absent. Further, certain clauses appeared to shift the entire financial liability onto the league owner, even in the absence or default of a franchise holder. The Bench observed that such clauses required closer scrutiny and could not be accepted at face value without deeper examination of the contractual framework. Another significant discrepancy highlighted by the Tribunal was that the invoice was raised on 7 September 2024, whereas the Player Agreement was allegedly executed on 10 September 2024. According to the Bench, this inconsistency prima facie raised doubts about the genuineness and veracity of the agreement forming the basis of the claim. The Tribunal also noted that the agreement provided for payment partly linked to match participation and promotional obligations. However, no documentary material had been placed on record to demonstrate that the applicant had completed the league or fulfilled all contractual obligations that would entitle him to the entire claimed amount. In such circumstances, the Bench held that the existence and quantum of the alleged debt remained uncertain. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant failed to establish that an operational debt had become due and payable, which is a prerequisite for admission of an insolvency application under Section 9 of the IBC. Accordingly, the NCLT dismissed the insolvency petition, holding that the statutory requirements for initiating CIRP had not been satisfied. While rejecting the insolvency plea, the Tribunal clarified that the order would not prevent the applicant from pursuing other legal remedies. The parties are free to approach a civil court or any other appropriate forum to resolve the contractual dispute. Case Details Case Title: Shikhar Dhawan Versus Absolute Legends Sports Private Limited Citation: JURISHOUR-246-NCLT-2026(Del) Case No.: C.P. IB/533/ND/2025 Date: 05/02/2026 Counsel For Petitioner: Adhish Sharma Click Here To Read Order Read More: Determination Without Notice to Legal Representative Unsustainable: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Demand Issued to Deceased Proprietor

NCLT Rejects Shikhar Dhawan’s Insolvency Plea Against Legends League Operator

Membership Required

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 22 JULY, 2026

Parts Must Be Classified With Parent Printers: Customs Dept. Drops ₹23.63 Lakh Duty Demand on Inkjet Printheads [READ ORDER]

Appeal Filed Within 21 Days Must Be Heard Without Limitation Objection: Gauhati High Court Extends Interim Protection in GST Dispute

GSTAT Special Bench to Decide Whether Delay Beyond S. 107 Time Limit Can Be Condoned

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 22 JULY, 2026

Parts Must Be Classified With Parent Printers: Customs Dept. Drops ₹23.63 Lakh Duty Demand on Inkjet Printheads [READ ORDER]

Appeal Filed Within 21 Days Must Be Heard Without Limitation Objection: Gauhati High Court Extends Interim Protection in GST Dispute

About us

Company

Categories