9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 107 - 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 - Service of notice - time limitation - HELD THAT - The Demand Notice under Section 8 of the IBC, 2016 was sent by the Operational Creditor on 25.07.2018 to which the Corporate Debtor replied on 21.08.2018, which is beyond 10 days as given under Section 8 of the IBC, 2016. The Corporate Debtor through email admitted the claim of ₹ 2,94,208/- stating that the balance outstanding amount is the deduction for the loss and damage caused to the Corporate Debtor. However, the Corporate Debtor raised dispute when the Demand Notice was sent by the Operational Creditor. The Corporate Debtor accepted and admitted the dues for an amount of ₹ 1,94,208/- (Rupees one lakh ninety four thousand two hundred and eight). Hence, the claim of the Operational Creditor is accepted admitted by the Corporate Debtor. The default amount meets the threshold limit as per Section 4 of the IB Code, 2016 and is well within the limitation for filing the present application. It is clear that Corporate Debtor has defaulted in the payment of its debts. On the basis of the facts the application is otherwise defect free on record - Application admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues: Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor.
Analysis: 1. Claimed Debt and Background: The Operational Creditor filed an application seeking initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor for a claimed debt of ?7,00,297. The Operational Creditor provided logistic services to the Corporate Debtor, who failed to clear the outstanding dues despite reminders. 2. Debtor's Response and Disputes: The Corporate Debtor acknowledged the outstanding amount but disputed the claimed sum, citing deductions for various reasons. The Operational Creditor issued a Demand Notice under Section 8 of the IBC, to which the Corporate Debtor responded with a counterclaim of ?5,00,00,000, alleging losses due to mis-deliveries and delays. 3. Admission of Dues: The Corporate Debtor admitted to owing ?1,94,208 to the Operational Creditor, which was within the threshold limit for filing the application. The Corporate Debtor's default in payment was evident, leading to the acceptance of the Operational Creditor's claim by the Tribunal. 4. Order and Moratorium: The Tribunal admitted the application, declaring a moratorium under Section 14(1) of the Code. The moratorium prohibits various actions against the Corporate Debtor and is effective until the completion of CIRP or liquidation approval. The appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was mandated. 5. IRP's Duties and Obligations: The IRP was directed to carry out specified functions under the Code and manage the Corporate Debtor's operations. The Operational Creditor was instructed to provide an advance to the IRP for the CIRP's smooth conduct. The IRP was tasked with protecting and preserving the Corporate Debtor's assets. 6. Further Directives: The IRP was required to make a public announcement for CIRP initiation and call for claim submissions. Additionally, the supply of goods/services to the Corporate Debtor was to continue uninterrupted during the moratorium. The Registry was instructed to disseminate the order to relevant parties and upload it on the website. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal aspects, proceedings, and outcomes of the case, providing a comprehensive understanding of the Tribunal's decision.
|
