9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter of intent dated 22.1.2008 followed by purchase order dated 27.1.2008 for supply of pre-engineered solid web portals building system for Jamshedpur. It is pleaded that the petitioner during the course of execution of the two orders submitted running bills from time to time. The total bills for the supply of Singur order came to be Rs. 4,27,39,497/- against which a balance amount of Rs. 25,30,656 remains unpaid. Similarly, it is pleaded that the total bills for the Jamshedpur Project came to Rs. 4,99,67,836/- against which the respondent paid a sum of Rs. 4,55,34,037/- leaving a balance of Rs. 44,33,799/-. It is pleaded that after several reminders the respondents have vide email dated 5.12.2009 sent the statement of account confirming t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account of which the respondent suffered damages. Hence, he submits that no amounts are due and payable. Reliance was placed on the communication dated 27.9.2012. Reliance is also placed on judgment of this court in Nakshatra Steel Sales & Services Ltd. vs. M/s.Radlay Metal Products (P) Ltd., 2014 V AD (Delhi) 661. 4. I may deal with the pleas regarding the Singur Project as it has been pleaded that there are no complaints regarding the work done for the same. Regarding the Jamshedpur Project though there is an acknowledgement by the respondent acknowledging the dues, however, in view of the subsequent communications, it was very fairly pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the dues of the Jamshedpur Project may not be go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 15.4.2011 the petitioner has written to the respondent pointing out that a sum of Rs. 25,30,656/- is due from the respondent for the said project. The respondents have sent statement of their accounts where as on 5.12.2009 they admit an outstanding due of Rs. 36,30,656/-. 9. A conjoint reading of this statement of account and the reply filed by the respondent prima facie shows that an outstanding balance of Rs. 36,30,656/- remains for the Singur project as on 05.12.2009. This is presently Rs. 25,30,656/-. 10. I may now also look at the emails relied upon by the respondent to claim that the outstanding work has not been fully completed. I may note that these emails which have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mail by you without completing the job will not be entertained by any Caparo personals. Regards Prakash Sahu" Similarly, on 28.12.2010 the respondent also wrote as follows:- "Dear Mr Tiwari, Request you to go through the attached mails which are self explanatory and will certainly help to refresh your memories. I am sorry to say that in spite of several reminders, till date no one from side has turned up for completing the job at Jamshedpur. Please let me know as per our PO dated 27. 01.2008 and para f, why the LD clause will not be applicable to you." On 20.06.2011 the petitioner wrote as follows:- "Subject: Re: Request for release of long due outstanding payment against your order for Pre-engineered Building at Jamshedpur Dear s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the winding up petition it is manifest that the stated amount remains unpaid. The attempt of the respondents to claim that there is a bona fide dispute regarding the payment payable for the singur project appears to lack bona fide as in all the communications that have taken place after 5.12.2009 there is no reference to any deficit work regarding the Singur project. 13. Reference in this context may be had to the judgement of the Supreme Court in IBA Health (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Info-Drive Systems Sdn.Bhd., (2010) (4) CompLJ 481 (SC) where the Supreme Court held as follows:- "17. The question that arises for consideration is that when there is a substantial dispute as to liability, can a creditor prefer an application for winding-up for d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well as in the Delhi Gazette, at least 14 days prior to the next date of hearing. 15. Petitioner shall deposit a sum Rs. 75,000/- towards cost of the publication with the Official Liquidator within 2 weeks, subject to any further amounts that may be called for by the liquidator for this purpose, if required. The Official Liquidator shall also endeavour to prepare a complete inventory of all the assets of the respondent-company when the same are taken over; and the premises in which they are kept shall be sealed by him. At the same time, he may also seek the assistance of a valuer to value all assets to facilitate the process of winding up. It will also be open to the Official Liquidator to seek police help in the discharge of his duties, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
