9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prior existing dispute - Held that:- Looking to the record, we find substance in the arguments of learned counsel for Appellant that indeed there was a prior existing dispute and the application under Section 9 should not have been admitted. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order admitting the Insolvency Resolution Process is quashed and set aside. The further proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cess against the appellant (original respondent) Corporate Debtor on the grounds of default. The respondent claimed outstanding debt of ₹ 33.78 lakhs including of overdue interest. The respondent had sent Section 8 notice dated 22nd May, 2017 (Annexure A-7) and the appellant replied raising dispute vide reply dated 7th June, 2017. Reference was made to earlier exchange of correspondence dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fessional, who has been appointed. Counsel for Appellant stated that there are no other Creditors there. A Compromise has taken place would not be material for the decision of this appeal, once the process has been set into motion. We have to consider this appeal on its own merits. The learned counsel for the appellant refers to the letter dated 20th July, 2016 (Annexure-3) which was sent by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spute has been raised by the appellant in reply to the Section 8 notice. Learned counsel for the appellant is submitting that the understanding between parties about the business was violated and thus dispute had arisen. A prior existing dispute was there before Section 8 notice was sent and thus according to him the respondent could not have resorted Insolvency Proceeding. The learned counsel fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
