9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 1488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 019 - Ratakonda Murali, Judicial Member And Narender Kumar Bhola, Technical Member For the Applicant : Ashish Jain and Anshul Rawat, Advs. For the Respondent : A. Sanjay Kishore and H. Rajesh Kumar, Advs. ORDER RATAKONDA MURALI, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. The Present Application filed by the Applicant against the order of the Interim Resolution Professional wherein the entire claim of the Applicant was rejected. 2. The averments made in the Application are as follows: (a) It is averred that the Applicant filed its claim application (Form-B) before the Interim Resolution Professional on 29-12-2018, along with all necessary supporting documents to initiate its claim against the Corporate Debtor. On 11-2-2019 the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingly a Notice To Proceed (NTP) was issued to Operational Creditor, which forms a legal contract. ii. That the Applicant had received a Notice To Proceed (NTP) from Corporate Debtor for providing services at their plant, thus liable to honour outstanding payment. iii. That the Corporate Debtor itself admitted that the services were being rendered for the claimed period. iv. That the Corporate Debtor on many occasion sent e-mails to the Applicant, discussing work progress at their plant. v. That the Corporate Debtor on many occasion sent e-mails discussing attendance of Applicant's senior staff. vi. That the Corporate Debtor had himself agreed vide letter dated 23-8-2017 that the Applicant was provided with Notice To Proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s received an amount of ₹ 1,38,96,266 (Rupees One Crore Thirty Eight Lakhs Ninety Six Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Six Only), which was admittedly paid by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant. . Further an amount of ₹ 10,93,99,500 (Rupees Ten Crores Ninety Three Lakhs Ninety Nine Thousand Five Hundred Only) were set-off by the Applicant under letter of credit No. 0160ILCDA170702 dated July 31, 2017 against payments due by the Applicant to M/s. KSK Energy Ventures Limited (a group company of the Corporate Debtor) under purchase order dated July 3, 2017 for supply of turbine spares. (d) It is averred that the Corporate Debtor's books of account do not reflect any entry that the claimed amount is to be paid to the Applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orporate debtor and operational creditor. 7. It is the case of Applicant that again additional documents was sent on 4-3-2019 to revise the interim order. Applicant came to know that the claim was rejected vide order dated 19-3-2019. 8. Learned counsel for applicant contended that Applicant filed sufficient proof in support of the claims filed with RP. However, RP rejected the claim without admitting. Therefore this application is filed to give directions to RP to admit the claim of Applicant. Learned counsel contended the Applicant has filed the additional documents along with application sent through e-mail dated 13-2-2019 shown as Annnexure 4 at pgs. 97-131. Again additional documents were sent to the RP shown as Annexure 6 at pgs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n as Annexure C. Thus entire claim of Applicant was set-off against payment to KSK Energies Ventures Limited due by Applicant. Therefore no amount is due and payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant in its books of account. Counsel contended Applicant filed only proforma invoices dated 11-9-2018 it shows they were subsequent created by Applicant. Thus the claim of Applicant is not found in the books of account of Corporate Debtor. Counsel for RP has relied upon Annexure C (Colly). The documents relating to set-off of ₹ 10,93,99,500/-. Counsel also relied on ledger copy of Corporate Debtor shown as Annexure D at Pages 248-254 of the counter. Thus learned counsel contended no amount is payable by Corporate Debtor to the Applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
