9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1074X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Corporate Debtor having been dishonored, it is hereby construed that the Corporate Debtor has defaulted in making the repayment after supply of goods by the Petitioner herein. This Petition clearly reveals that there is a debt as defined in Section 3(11) of I&B Code 2016, also there is default in this case within the meaning of Section 3(12) of I&B Code 2016, this Bench hereby admits this petition filed under Section 9 of I & B Code 2016, declaring moratorium with consequential directions - C.P. NO. 1112/1&BP/2017 - - - Dated:- 6-7-2017 - Hon'ble Mr. B.S.V. Prakash Kumar, Member (Judicial) and Hon'ble Mr. V. Nallasenapathy, Member (Technical) For the Petitioner: Mr. Amir Arsiwala, Advocate and Mr. Shambhu Jha, Advocat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,54,475.00 2,54,475.00 2. 541257 17.06.2016 7,875.00 7,875.00 3. 541353 11.07.2016 1,90,125.00 1,90,125.00 4. 541376 16.07.2016 92,475.00 92,475.00 5. 541397 19.07.2016 89,550.00 89,550.00 6. 541424 26.07.2016 1,55,025.00 67,025.00 Total 789,525.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing No.430836 for 92,475 and another cheque bearing No.430851 for an amount of ₹ 2,54,475/- presenting it and another correspondence dated 22.7.2016 to show that this Corporate Debtor requesting the petitioner to withhold the cheque bearing No-216641 for ₹ 2,54,475/- presenting it, so that the Corporate Debtor would clear the cheques in the following week. 5. The second email correspondence with the Corporate Debtor reflects that the debtor giving another cheque and later dishonoring it. To prove that the payments have not been made despite notice served upon the Corporate Debtor, the Petitioner filed a Certificate issued by the Union Bank of India dated 1.7.2017, reflecting that the account of the Petitioner herein has no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efence is too fragile because the petitioner is at liberty to proceed in the way it wants, it would not be at the dictate of the debtor, the only point left to it take up is as to whether goods supplied or not, whether they are of quality as agreed in between them and any proceedings pending over it, here nothing of that kind, therefore the argument of filing criminal case against the corporate debtor in relation to only one cheque, has not made any sense for seeking dismissal of this case. Since the cheque bounce case being a criminal case and the debtor having not disputed issuing such cheque, it will not come within the definition of dispute 8. To prove the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner filed Purchase Order which is not dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eaning of Section 3(12) of I B Code 2016, this Bench hereby admits this petition filed under Section 9 of I B Code 2016, declaring moratorium with consequential directions as mentioned below: (a) That this Bench hereby prohibits the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
