Creditor Route Selection Master

Reviewed by CA Nikhil Gupta and Kajri Singh · Last reviewed 18 July 2026

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.

Resolution Plan Evaluation Master →