9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Petitioner's claim of debt against respondent's company due to non-payment and commercial insolvency. Respondent's objection to the claim based on petitioner's alleged lack of a valid license for dealing with telecom equipment. Analysis: The petitioner, a subsidiary of a renowned company, supplied telecom equipment to the respondent, a telecom equipment trader. The respondent failed to pay the principal sum of Rs. 18,42,155.28 along with interest, leading to dishonored cheques and legal notices. The respondent contended that the petitioner lacked a valid license for dealing with the goods, rendering the demand void under section 23 of the Indian Contracts Act. The respondent's objection centered on the petitioner's alleged lack of a valid license under the Indian Telegraph Act during the transactions. However, the petitioner provided evidence of possessing a valid license until 31st December, 2001, as per the Wireless Telegraphy Act and related rules. The respondent's objection was raised belatedly, despite prior dealings and acknowledgments of the debt owed. The court rejected the respondent's objection, emphasizing that the petitioner had a valid license during the relevant transactions. The respondent's defense was deemed frivolous, lacking commercial morality, and an attempt to delay payment. The court cited the Supreme Court precedent regarding commercial immorality and upheld the petitioner's claim based on the admitted liability, dishonored cheques, and the respondent's failure to comply with statutory notices. Consequently, the court admitted the petition for hearing, directed publication of the citation, and appointed the Official Liquidator as the Provisional Liquidator to take over the assets and records of the respondent-company. The judgment favored the petitioner's claim of debt against the respondent, establishing the respondent's indebtedness and inability to repay the debt.
|
