9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f admission. Based on the agreement, documents and submissions made by the parties, it is clear that the Applicant could not prove that the goods were supplied by lorry to the Corporate Debtor address. The lorry details of the consignment, delivery challan in proof of the same are not enclosed. Based on few emails exchanged between the parties and dishonored cheques, it is not appropriate to conclude the debt and default. The Applicant failed to satisfy this Adjudicating Authority that as per the invoices the goods were delivered by a lorry consignment to the address of the Corporate Debtor. Hence, neither the debt nor the default is proved. Since there were business dealings between the parties, it is not possible to pick and choose the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Applicant submits that from 29.12.2017 to 10.02.2018, the Applicant supplied imported coal to the Corporate Debtor and raised various invoices on the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor accepted the consignment without demand or protest. The total outstanding as on date of filing of this application is sum of ₹ 97,70,147/-. Demand notice dated 26.02.2019 was issued to the Corporate Debtor, copy of which is enclosed at Page 29 of the application. In support of the claim, the Applicant has also filed bank statement, copy of which is enclosed at Page 74 of the application. The Applicant has also filed copy of workings for computation of amounts and date of default in tabular form at Page 75 of the application. 3. The Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... receipt are not enclosed. The Respondent categorically states that he has not received the materials mentioned in the invoices annexed along with the application. 4. The Applicant has filed rejoinder dated 10.12.2019. In the rejoinder, the Applicant denies the averment of the Corporate Debtor. The Applicant accepts that except the payment received on 08.03.2018 through Letter of Credit, the Corporate Debtor never issued any other Letter of Credit. As such, the amount is due and payable. Furthermore, by email dated 23.11.2017, the Corporate Debtor has acknowledged the receipt of the goods. Copies of the invoices at page 13 to 20 are enclosed in the application. In respect of the same, the Corporate Debtor has issued cheques. Along with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n few emails exchanged between the parties and dishonored cheques, it is not appropriate to conclude the debt and default. Hence, this Adjudicating Authority cannot conclude the debt and default based on the disputed invoices and also on a selective emails filed along with the rejoinder, exchange of few emails can only be a supportive document and cannot be treated as conclusive proof. In the matter of Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. vs. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd., the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: 40. It is clear, that once the Operational Creditor has filed an application, which is otherwise complete, the Adjudicating Authority must reject the application under Section 9 (5) (2) (d) if notice of dispute has been served by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
