9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MR. R. VARADHARAJAN, J. For The Petitioner : Avadh Kaushik, Pawan Verma and Devashish Maharishi, Advs. For The Respondent : Ms. Tanya Sharma, Adv. ORDER This is an Application which is filed by an Operational Creditor namely M/s. Explo Media Private Limited having its registered office at 524-525, Paras Trade Centre, Gurgaon-Faridabad Toll Road, Gurgaon (Haryana)-122009. From Part-II of the Application filed the particulars of the Corporate Debtor is given as under: (i) The Corporate Debtor is Respondent above named, namely, Ambience Private Limited. (ii) The Corporate Debtor is stated to have been incorporated on 14.4.1986. (iii) The authorized capital of the Corporate Debtor is stated to be ₹ 4,00,00,00, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Operational Creditor has claimed interest @ 18% per annum. In addition to payment of ₹ 61,85,400/- as the balance invoice amount payable, the Corporate Debtor, it is contended by the Petitioner is also liable to pay interest quantified based on the above premise which amounts to ₹ 29,63,983/- and thus the total amount in default on the part of the Corporate Debtor it is averred aggregates to ₹ 91,49,383/-. Despite repeated assurances about payment, the Corporate Debtor it is claimed could not pay the due amount to the Operational Creditor. Further numerous correspondence/requests, also did not yield any result and in the circumstances the Operational Creditor was forced to issue notice as provided for under Section 8 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Petitioner was also directed to issue notice to the registered office of the Corporate Debtor and the matter was to be listed on 2.8.2017. The Corporate Debtor entered appearance subsequently and in compliance with the directions of this Tribunal a reply has been filed after failure of settlement talks between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor. 4. Perusal of the reply as filed by the Corporate Debtor shows that the Operational Creditor while taking up the outdoor display campaign at the approved locations had assured to provide bright lights on the hoardings to the satisfaction of the Corporate Debtor. There was according to the Corporate Debtor deficiency in service inasmuch as there was no bright light display in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Hon ble Tribunal as is required to be stated by way of an affidavit under Section 9(3)(b) of IBC, 2016 and in the circumstances the material particulars had not been stated in the affidavit filed by the Operational Creditor and on this ground alone the Petition is liable to be dismissed. It is also contended by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that a certificate from the bankers as directed to be produced vide order dated 21.7.2017 has not been produced within the timeframe, as provided under the provisions of IBC, 2016 or in compliance of the said order. There has been delay in the production of certificate from the bankers and hence the Petition is liable to be dismissed also on this ground. In any case, it is also submitted by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs which are required to be displayed and properly lighted or illuminated to be visible to passers by. 7. In the exercise of summary jurisdiction, this Tribunal, that too after more than 3 years or close to it, cannot examine the veracity of the rival claims in relation to lighting and display of hoardings. Further no certificate has been produced by the Operational Creditor from any independent authority or body to sustain prima facie that the services rendered by it was of requisite standard comparable to market standards/yardstick for similar flexes/hoardings displayed for advertisement purposes and thus the claim cannot be decided in a summary manner. Sufficient to say that in relation to dispute this Tribunal is guided by the judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
