9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 - - - Dated:- 12-2-2019 - DR. DEEPTI MUKESH For The Applicant : Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, Adv. Ms. Damayanti, Adv. Mr. Aditya Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rishi Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Parshant Bhardwaj, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Arvind Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ishan Bisht, Adv. Mr. Parthiv K. Goswami, Adv. Ms. Heena George, Adv. Ms. V.S. Lakshmi, Advocate JUDGEMENT 1. The present application is filed under section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity IBC, 2016 ) read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 by CIL Australia North Pty Limited, (for brevity Applicant ), with a prayer to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Reso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of the Contracts, the Corporate Debtor defaulted in its payment obligations under the said Contracts, and notified the Operational Creditor that it would be unable to perform its obligations under the said Contracts. Accordingly, the Operational Creditor was constrained to invoke arbitration pursuant to the GAFTA (The Grain and Feed Trade Association) Arbitration Rules No. 125, which were incorporated into the said Contracts. 7. The Applicant has submitted that with regard to the said unpaid amount, invoices dated 31.10.2017 were raised by the applicant on corporate debtor. The applicant further submits that regular follow ups were made through emails, but no payment was ever received. 8. The Applicant served a demand notice, d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both parties. Under the 2nd Settlement Agreement, the Corporate Debtor was to pay the Operational Creditor, the settlement sum of USD 605,000 in 36 equal monthly installments of USD 16,805.40 each, with the first installment becoming payable from 1st October 2018. 10. The Applicant further submitted that under the terms of both the Settlement Agreements, the Corporate Debtor was to make payment in accordance with the schedule agreed between the parties, with the first installment payments under both Settlement Agreements falling due on 1st October 2018. However, the Corporate Debtor has failed to pay the first installment amount of USD 57,526.94 under the 1st Settlement Agreement and the first installment amount of USD 16,805.40 under 2n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77 of 2018 seeking, inter alia, a decree that the said two Settlement Agreements be declared null and void and not binding on the instant Respondent (being plaintiff in said suit). Further, the execution, validity and legality of the said alleged Settlement Agreements have been assailed before the appropriate civil court, namely, Ld. Additional District Judge cum Presiding Judge, Special Commercial Court at Gurugram and the same was filed on 16.10.2018 much prior to the demand notice sent by the Applicant under Section 8 of the IBC, 2016. 14. It is stated by the Respondent that the notice was issued in the said suit by the Ld. ADJ, Gurugram vide order dated 02.11.2018. Thereafter, two Defendants including the Applicant herein have entere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Software Private Limited, in civil appeal number 9405 of 2017 vide order dated 21.09.2017 and has held that: Therefore, all the adjudicating authority is to see at this stage is whether there is a plausible contention which requires further investigation and that the dispute is not a patently feeble legal argument or an assertion of fact unsupported by evidence. It is important to separate the grain from the chaff and to reject a spurious defence which is mere bluster. However, in doing so, the court does not need to be satisfied that the defence is likely to succeed. The court does not at this stage examine the merits of the dispute except to the extent indicated above. So long as a dispute truly exist in fact and is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
