9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 1056 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Operational Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - Time limitation - service of demand notice - whether the demand notice in Form No.3 dated 23.11.2019 was served upon the Respondent? - HELD THAT - The demand notice was sent via a registered post on 23.11.2019 to the corporate debtor and its directors. The postal receipt is attached on Page 198 (Annexure 5) of the Application. Whether the Respondent disputed the operational debt? - HELD THAT - The Respondent has not filed a reply in this regard. However, considering communication on record between the parties, there is no dispute regarding the goods supply and quality. Thus, as per documents placed on record with the adjudicating authority, there is no dispute as to the outstanding liability of the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor towards the Applicant/ Operational Creditor. There is a total unpaid operational debt (in default) of Rs. 2,47,456/-, including the interest @ 18% per annum. It is observed that the Operational Creditor has issued various invoices (Annexure 3) for goods supplied to the Corporate Debtor. Operational Creditor has given demand notice in Form-3 dated 23.11.2019, duly served on the Respondent. This Adjudicating Authority has held above that the Operational Creditor correctly delivered the demand notice in Form No.3, and no pre-existing dispute is proved. It has been shown that the Corporate Debtor has failed to make payment of the aforesaid amount due as mentioned in the statutory notice to date. It is also observed that the conditions under Section 9 of the Code stand satisfied. Hence, this Adjudicating Authority is inclined to commence CIRP against the Corporate Debtor as envisaged under the provisions of IBC, 2016. Petition admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues Involved:
Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against a Private Limited Company. Detailed Analysis: 1. Operational Creditor's Claim: The Applicant, an Operational Creditor, filed an Application under Section 9 of the IBC against the Respondent, a Private Limited Company, for non-payment of outstanding invoices amounting to Rs. 1,61,930/-. The Applicant provided details of the debt, including part-payments made by the Respondent and interest charged on the outstanding amount. 2. Demand Notice and Communication: The Applicant issued a Demand Notice under Section 8 of the Code, demanding payment of the outstanding debt. Despite reminders and requests, the Respondent failed to make the balance payment, leading to the initiation of the insolvency process. The communication between the parties showed no dispute regarding the quality or quantity of goods supplied. 3. Jurisdiction and Limitation: The Adjudicating Authority confirmed its jurisdiction to entertain the Application, as the Respondent's registered office was in Jaipur. The Application was filed within the period of limitation, as the debt fell due on 16.12.2016, and the Application was filed on 11.12.2019. 4. Ex-Parte Order: The Respondent failed to appear before the Court despite notices being duly served. The Adjudicating Authority proceeded ex-parte and examined the completeness of the Application, finding no dispute regarding the outstanding liability of the Respondent towards the Applicant. 5. Admission of CIRP: The Adjudicating Authority found the conditions under Section 9 of the Code satisfied and decided to commence Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Respondent. An Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed, and the Applicant was directed to deposit a sum for the IRP's expenses. 6. Consequences of CIRP: Upon admission of CIRP, the IRP was directed to take over the affairs of the Corporate Debtor, issue public notices, invoke a moratorium, and manage the proceedings as per the timelines specified in the Code. The management powers of the Corporate Debtor were suspended, and cooperation with the IRP was mandated. 7. Communication and Compliance: The Order admitting the CIRP was to be communicated to all relevant parties, including the Applicant, Corporate Debtor, and the appointed IRP. The Registry was directed to provide necessary copies to ensure compliance with the Order. 8. Conclusion: The Application for initiation of CIRP against the Respondent was admitted, and the necessary steps were outlined for the IRP to manage the resolution process in accordance with the provisions of the IBC. End of Analysis.
|
