9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble of being understood to have, in any manner, acceded to the petitioner's counter proposal or admitted the amount claimed by the petitioner. For a petition to be admitted in this jurisdiction, the petitioner has ordinarily to, not only show that a sum in excess of Rs. 500 is due and owing to it from the company, but also demonstrate the quantum of the debt due. At the very least, on the basis of documents contained in the petition which have been relied upon in course of the hearing, it cannot be said that the petitioner has been able to establish the amount which is due and owing from the company.It does not appear that the defence is altogether moonshine or without basis. Though the company has not been called upon in course of the h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms of Rs. 71,11,716.55 on the 15th day of the four succeeding months. The total amount which the petitioner required the company to pay was Rs. 3,82,46,866.21. 4. Within a couple of hours of the petitioner's aforesaid mail being received by the company, it replied as follows: "I had given you the payment plan which I feel was possible from our side. I would once again request you to please accept our payment plan and confirm so the initial payment could be made before the commit (sic) day. The intent is to pay the basis that I had committed dates below. Request your understanding and cooperation and an confirmation." 5. The petitioner says that since the mail of the company set out above followed the petitioner's mail earlier in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had suffered loss of business and damages. The company claimed a total amount of Rs. 795.94 lakh from petitioner on account of the petitioner's withdrawal of business from the company, godown rent, bank interest, credit notes, claim on entry tax, bad debts and loss of reputation leading to shrinkage of business. The company declined altogether that any payment was due or owing from the company to the petitioner after taking into account the company's claim against the petitioner. 9. The petitioner says that the e-mail exchanged between the parties in April, 2009 did not indicate claims in the nature of damages on account of alleged loss of business or loss of reputation. The petitioner suggests that the company had only sought adjustment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, the petitioner has ordinarily to, not only show that a sum in excess of Rs. 500 is due and owing to it from the company, but also demonstrate the quantum of the debt due. At the very least, on the basis of documents contained in the petition which have been relied upon in course of the hearing, it cannot be said that the petitioner has been able to establish the amount which is due and owing from the company. 12. If the amount claimed by the petitioner of about Rs. 4.1 crore is accepted to be the amount due from the company to the petitioner on account of the unpaid bills, it does not appear that the credit that the company sought has been given to the company by the petitioner. There is a serious question to be gone into, not only on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
