Skip to content
Home / Knowledge hubs / IBC, 2016 Corpus / Practice Masters

Creditor Route Selection Master

Choosing the right trigger — Section 7 (financial creditor), Section 9 (operational creditor) or Section 10 (corporate debtor itself) — and the procedural differences between them.

Financial vs operational creditor route

A financial creditor filing under Section 7 needs only to establish default and produce evidence (increasingly, an IU record) — NCLT admission is comparatively fast and does not require the debtor's dispute of the debt to be resolved first. An operational creditor under Section 9 must first send a demand notice (Section 8) and wait 10 days; if the corporate debtor raises a pre-existing dispute (genuine, not spurious) in that window, the application is liable to be rejected at the threshold — a materially higher bar than the financial-creditor route.

Corporate debtor self-filing (Section 10)

The corporate debtor itself (via a special/board resolution) may apply for its own CIRP — useful where management recognises insolvency is inevitable and prefers an orderly, board-initiated process over waiting for a creditor to act, though it surrenders board control to the IRP/RP immediately on admission just as a creditor-filed case would.

Threshold and pre-filing checks

Confirm the ₹1 crore minimum default threshold is met (aggregated across defaults for the same debtor, not per-creditor for Section 7), check no parallel proceeding already bars a fresh filing (e.g. an existing CIRP against the same debtor), and assemble documentary evidence of debt/default before filing — a defective or premature filing risks outright rejection with associated delay and cost.

Educational summary of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, its Regulations and case law as understood at review date 2026-07-18. Not a substitute for the official Code/Regulations text, current NCLT/NCLAT/Supreme Court rulings, or professional advice on a specific matter.

Resolution Plan Evaluation Master →