Paytm Drags WinZO to NCLT Over ₹3.6 Crore Unpaid Dues After Gaming Ban
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has issued a notice to online gaming company WinZO after Paytm filed an insolvency plea claiming non-payment of around ₹3.6 crore for advertising services. The plea, filed by One97 Communications (Paytm’s parent company), was heard by a Bench consisting of Justice Jyotsna Sharma (Judicial Member) and Anu Jagmohan Singh (Technical Member).
WinZO has been given two weeks to respond, and the case will be heard again on December 15.
Senior Advocate Krishnendu Datta, representing Paytm, told the tribunal that the dues arose from four invoices issued for promotional activities of WinZO’s gaming products—such as poker and rummy—on Paytm’s app. Each invoice had a 60-day payment period, and a formal demand notice was sent on October 1, 2025. Despite this, the payments were not made.
Paytm argued that WinZO did not dispute the delivery of the advertising services. Instead, it claimed that the invoices had not yet been “validated” internally and were under investigation. Paytm termed this explanation a “sham defence,” noting that WinZO had never raised any objection about the ads being placed.
To support its case, Paytm submitted validation data from AppFlyer, confirming that all contractual requirements were met.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate Abhishek Malhotra, representing WinZO, cited internal company emails to show that the invoices had not been validated and were still being reviewed by the central team as per Clause 14 of the purchase order.
Paytm countered that WinZO could not use the validation process to delay payments indefinitely and that, under law, a reasonable timeline is always implied when contracts are silent on deadlines.
Datta further pointed out that WinZO had cleared previous invoices without any issues and that the default began only after the government’s ban on online real-money gaming came into effect. He suggested that the ban had affected WinZO’s finances, leading to the delay in payments.
The tribunal allowed WinZO to file its detailed reply and adjourned the matter for further hearing on December 15.
Paytm’s legal team included advocates Ajay Kumar, Stuti Vatsa, Abhay Kumar Yadav, Vijayant Goel, and Aditi Tripathi. WinZO was represented by Advocate Srishti Gupta from Dugal Grewal & Partners, under the supervision of Senior Advocate Abhishek Malhotra.
