The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench, has admitted an insolvency petition filed by One97 Communication Limited, the company behind Paytm's digital services business, against gaming platform operator Fabzen Technologies Private Limited over unpaid dues exceeding ₹3.41 crore.
The tribunal held that the operational debt was established and that Fabzen Technologies failed to demonstrate any genuine pre-existing dispute that could prevent initiation of insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
Background of the Case
According to the petition, One97 Communication provided digital advertising and in-app promotional services for Fabzen's gaming applications, including campaigns related to its online gaming products.
The operational creditor claimed that Fabzen issued several purchase orders and continued to avail advertising services from 2024 onwards. While initial invoices were paid, payments against later invoices allegedly remained outstanding. The company claimed a default amount of ₹3.41 crore, with the date of default stated as 7 January 2025.
One97 also relied on emails exchanged between the parties, contending that Fabzen repeatedly acknowledged the outstanding dues and sought time to make payments.
Fabzen's Defence
Fabzen opposed the insolvency petition, arguing that disputes had arisen regarding the performance and effectiveness of the advertising campaigns.
The company claimed that campaign results did not meet expectations in terms of user acquisition and revenue generation. It also argued that later regulatory restrictions affecting online gaming had impacted the commercial purpose of the arrangement.
According to Fabzen, these issues constituted genuine disputes that existed before the insolvency proceedings were initiated.
Tribunal's Observations
After examining the email correspondence and documents on record, the bench found that the communications relied upon by Fabzen mainly reflected discussions about campaign optimisation and performance review rather than a dispute over liability for invoices.
The tribunal noted that despite raising concerns about campaign performance, Fabzen continued placing purchase orders and availing services from One97.
The bench observed,
“The correspondence primarily reflects performance review discussions and requests for optimisation, which are inherent in continuing commercial advertising arrangements.”
It further noted that Fabzen had repeatedly sought time to clear outstanding dues and proposed repayment schedules.
Questioning the company's stand, the tribunal observed that if the invoices were genuinely disputed, there was no reason for repeated assurances regarding payment.
The bench also rejected the argument that subsequent gaming regulations frustrated the contract, holding that the alleged defaults had arisen before the legislation came into force.
Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. v. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd., the tribunal held that the defence raised by Fabzen did not amount to a bona fide pre-existing dispute.
Decision
Concluding that One97 Communication had successfully established the existence of operational debt and default, the NCLT held that all requirements under Sections 8 and 9 of the IBC had been satisfied.
The tribunal admitted the insolvency application against Fabzen Technologies, commenced the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), declared a moratorium under Section 14 of the Code, and appointed insolvency professional Manish Lalji Dawda as the Interim Resolution Professional.
Case Details:
Case Title: One 97 Communication Limited v. Fabzen Technologies Private Limited
Case Number: CP (IB) No. 884/MB/2025
Judge: Shri Nilesh Sharma (Judicial Member) and Shri Sameer Kakar (Technical Member)
Decision Date: 18 June 2026
-300x169.webp)
