9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Debtor Company. The petition is therefore to be admitted. In the result, the Adjudicating Authority admits this Petition under Section 9 of IBC, 2016, declaring moratorium for the purposes referred to in Section 14 of the Code - CP(IB) No. 149/9/HDB/2018 - - - Dated:- 30-8-2018 - SHRI RATAKONDA MURALI, MEMBER JUDICIAL For The Petitioner : Sanjay Kumar Sharda, CA and Mohit Bothra, CS For The Respondent : Pranay Somini, Advocate ORDER 1. Sheetal Ispat Private Limited, Operational Creditor filed the Petition under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Read with Rule-6 of Insolvency 85 Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. Petitioner/Operational Creditor filed Form-5. 2. Brief averments made in the Petition are as follows:- (1) The Petitioner Company Sheetal Ispat Private Limited is Operational Creditor. The operational creditor is engaged in the business of trading in Iron and Steel and also a trader in steel steel products. (2) Legend Estates Private Limited is the Corporate Debtor, having its registered office at 6-3-1238, 6th Floor, Legend Apartment Renuka Enclave, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Tel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 is marked as Annexure-XIV. Hence Operational Creditor/Petitioner requests the Tribunal to admit the case and initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. 3. Corporate Debtor has filed counter. The contentions in brief are as follows:- (1) It is contended that the total volume of business between the petitioner and Respondent was to the tune of ₹ 1,64,44,016/- out of which ₹ 1,26,67,412/- was paid and balance of ₹ 37,76,604/-is due for which the Corporate Debtor issued four post-dated cheques which has not been cleared till date is false and incorrect, which is contrary to the purchase order dated 12.04.2013 filed by the Petitioner and marked as Annexure-VII. (2) It is further contented that after constant efforts and follow ups of the representatives of the Corporate Debtor company the Petitioner has not supplied the TMT Iron bars in good conditions and the same was not as per specifications of the Corporate and substandard material was delivered at the site of the Corporate Debtor Company. It is the case of Corporate Debtor that when the Engineers of the Company came to know about the defective quality of the material, they conveyed the rejection of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Petitioner/Operational Creditor that it had supplied goods to the Corporate Debtor in pursuant of purchase order placed by the Corporate Debtor dated 12.04.2013. It is the case of Operational Creditor, goods were supplied to the Corporate Debtor during 2012-13 2013-14. The value of goods supplied to the Corporate Debtor was at ₹ 1,64,44,016/- out of which Corporate Debtor paid an amount of ₹ 1,16,67,412/- on various dates and leaving a balance of ₹ 37,76,604/-. 7. The case of Corporate Debtor that no amount is due by it to the Operational Creditor. The case of Corporate debtor, purchase order which is marked as Annexure-7 dated 12.04.2013 is at ₹ 1,12,65,345/- and invoices raised for the same for ₹ 1,12,85,423/-. Thus, the case of Corporate Debtor that it had paid money covered by purchase order under Annexure-7. Thus, there is no amount due by it to the Operational Creditor. 8. The Operational Creditor has to establish that an amount of ₹ 37,76,604/- was payable under the invoices by Corporate Debtor and if interest @ 24% is added over the balance amount then the amount payable by Corporate Debtor is ₹ 79,20,558/-. 9. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Debtor is saying it had paid amount due under the invoice in respect of purchase order dated 12.04.2013 marked as Annexure-7. Which version is to be accepted if goods supplied were of inferior quality, then there was no need for Corporate Debtor to pay amount to the Operational Creditor under the invoices. Quite contra, Corporate Debtor pleaded that amount due under Purchase order dated 12.04.13 and consequent invoices raised were fully honoured. Therefore, the plea taken by the Corporate Debtor cannot be relied and dispute raised by Corporate Debtor is nothing but spurious. 12. It is also the specific case of Operational Creditor that Corporate Debtor had issued cheques and cheques were not honoured. The total amount for which cheques were issued is for ₹ 37,67,005/-. Details of cheques are given. Interestingly, cheques were for the balance amount. What was the need to give cheques for the balance, if no amount was due to the Operational Creditor? The answer given by the Corporate Debtor that cheques were given as security. The supply was made in 2013. The invoices were raised during the month of April and May, 2013. Surprisingly, 3 cheques were issued in 2015. If reall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ussed at length that there is absolutely no material to accept the contention of the Corporate Debtor that goods supplied are of inferior quality. Regarding discharge, the Corporate Debtor failed to prove the same. 16. The Corporate Debtor filed invoices and delivery challans. The Corporate Debtor has not given any account sheet maintained in respect of goods supplied by Operational Creditor. Absolutely there is no dispute in respect of raising invoices and in pursuance of invoices goods were delivered to the Corporate Debtor. Both sides are relying on invoices and delivery challans. The Corporate Debtor has not furnished any account in support of its contention that no amount was due or a part of the goods supplied was found defective and value thereof. The Corporate Debtor in the normal course should have maintained an account in respect of transactions with Operational Creditor. The Corporate Debtor is a company and it is bound to maintain accounts. The Corporate Debtor has not filed any ledger copy relating to the transactions with Operational Creditor. Mere filing of invoices and delivery challans do not in any way support the contention of the Corporate Debtor that no amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orporate 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 under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002); the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in possession of the corporate Debtor; (b) That the supply of essential goods or services to the Corporate Debtor, if continuing, shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during moratorium period. (c) That the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 14 shall not apply to such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator. (d) That the order of moratorium shall have effect from 30.08.2018 till the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process or until this Be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
