9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1390X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in regard to the claim amount prior to the filing of the Petition, this Tribunal will not be in a position to entertain and go into the same. Petition dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der which ₹ 29,88,291/- towards Royalty from March 2018 to August 2018 is claimed. In addition, Royalty from September 2018 till 19.12.2018 aggregating to ₹ 16,32,741/- is also claimed. Detailed reply to the notice of demand has been given by the Corporate Debtor which has also been filed along with the typed set to the Petition as an Annexure II. 5. Perusal of the notice of dispute sent in response to the demand notice as issued by the Corporate Debtor wherein it is seen that the amount of demand is sought to be resisted by the Corporate Debtor. 6. In view of the failure on the part of the Corporate Debtor in making payment of the amount claimed under the Demand Notice, this Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,000/- and why he has not made full invoices based on the franchise agreement. Therefore, this Court is of the view that all these issues are disputed questions of fact, which cannot be gone into at this stage of the matter, and the same could be proved only during trial. Hence, this Court, is prima facie of the view that, it would be appropriate to let the parties go for trial, only, thereafter, this Court can decide about that validity of the franchise agreement and whether the applicant made any request to furnish detailed turnover on the respondent based on the franchise agreement and there is failure on the part of the respondent to furnish such details to the applicant These facts can be proved only in the trial after hearing the part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
