9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1153 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyInitiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor - Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as Code) read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 - Service of notice - whether the demand notice in Form No. 3 dated 26.12.2018 was properly served? - HELD THAT - The demand notice was sent at the address as per the master data at Page 71 of the petition in which the registered office shown as 2937, Ground Floor, Ganesh Nagar, Link Road, Ludhiana. The demand notice was sent by speed post. The tracking report filed at Page No.39 of the petition shows delivery on 31.12.2018 (Consignment No. EP367302765N). Whether the operational debt was disputed by the corporate debtor? - HELD THAT - The demand notice in Form No. 3 is stated to be issued on 26.12.2018 and served by speed post on the Corporate Debtor on 31.12.2018. We have also discussed above that Shri Vinod Kumar, Sole Proprietor of the financial creditor has filed an affidavit dated 04.02.2018 stating that the petitioner has neither received any notice from the Corporate Debtor relating to a dispute of the unpaid operational debt nor it has received any payment against the outstanding amount. Therefore, any dispute with regard to the operational debt is not proved. In view of the satisfaction of the conditions provided for in Section 9(5)(i) of the Code, the petition is admitted for CIRP - moratorium declared.
Issues:
1. Proper service of demand notice in Form No. 3 2. Dispute regarding operational debt 3. Admissibility of the petition under Section 9(5)(i) of the Code Issue 1: Proper service of demand notice in Form No. 3 The Tribunal examined the delivery of the demand notice sent via speed post to the registered office of the Corporate Debtor. The tracking report confirmed delivery on 31.12.2018, establishing the proper service of the notice as per the requirements. Issue 2: Dispute regarding operational debt The Tribunal reviewed the lack of dispute raised by the Corporate Debtor regarding the operational debt. Despite the issuance of a demand notice and no response from the Corporate Debtor, the Sole Proprietor of the Operational Creditor affirmed in an affidavit that no notice of dispute or payment was received, indicating the absence of any proven dispute. Issue 3: Admissibility of the petition under Section 9(5)(i) of the Code In accordance with Section 9(5)(i) of the Code, the Tribunal assessed the completeness of the application, the existence of unpaid operational debt, and the proper delivery of invoices and notices to the Corporate Debtor. With all conditions satisfied, including the absence of a dispute and the proposal of an Interim Resolution Professional, the Tribunal admitted the petition for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Tribunal declared a moratorium under Section 14 of the Code, suspending legal actions against the Corporate Debtor and appointing an Interim Resolution Professional. The appointed professional was directed to manage the affairs of the Corporate Debtor, prepare asset inventories, and conduct creditor meetings. The Interim Resolution Professional was instructed to comply with the Code and report progress regularly to the Tribunal. The order communicated to both parties marked the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.
|
