9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 944X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00/- even after the cheque was returned by the Bank till the date of filing of this application on 27th December, 2018 which speaks volumes about the whole issue between the parties. First of all, there was no reason to keep the cheque pending till it becomes stale and once it has been returned by the Bank, the natural conduct of a creditor is to at least send an email or letter informing the Corporate Debtor to make the payment due from it to the Financial Creditor, instead of straightway rushing to this Adjudicating Authority by way of an application under section 7 of the Code, which is the harshest step for any person to take particularly with a person who is stated to be a friend as stated in the application and the loan was also allegedly given as friendly loan. This is not a fit case for admission of the application or for initiation of CIRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor. The application has so many infirmities, due to which the application of the Financial Creditor is to be rejected. Application dismissed. - C. P. (IB)No. 98/KB/2019 - - - Dated:- 10-8-2021 - Rajasekhar V.K., Member (J) And Harish Chander Suri, Member (T) For the Appellant : Urmila Chakra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inclusive of interest), as per the Tabular Statement annexed with the application as 'Annexure-E'. The Financial Creditor has requested for future interest as well. The Financial Creditor has also filed on record the Bank Statement evidencing disbursement of inter-corporate deposit of ₹ 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) 9th April, 2018 by Financial Creditor to Corporate Debtor. 5. The Financial Creditor has proposed the name of Mr. Manish Jain, having its registration No. IIBI/IPA-001/IP-P00582/2017-2018/11023 to act as an Insolvency Resolution Professional in case the Corporate Debtor is directed to undergo CIRP. 6. The Corporate Debtor, however, in its reply affidavit sworn on 6th July, 2019 filed on 26th July, 2019, through its authorized representative Mr. Manish Kumar Agarwal, has submitted that the copy of the application served upon the Corporate Debtor is incomplete and annexures starting at page No. 15 to 39 are completely illegible, and that the claim of the Financial Creditor is not maintainable against the Corporate Debtor. It was submitted by the Corporate Debtor that Entry Nos. 5 and 6 (Part 1) of Form 1 mandates the Financial Creditor to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated to the said transaction. 8. The Financial Creditor filed its rejoinder to the reply filed by the Corporate Debtor. In the rejoinder, the Financial Creditor has submitted that the Corporate Debtor has grossly suppressed the material facts of filing of a Title Suit against the Financial Creditor before the City Civil Court, Calcutta. It is submitted that the Corporate Debtor has failed to show that there is no default on its part to satisfy the financial debt due to the Financial Creditor. It is submitted that the Corporate Debtor has also failed to show in its reply affidavit that it has repaid the financial debt due to the Financial Creditor. It is submitted that the Corporate Debtor has admitted the receipt of the sums paid by the Financial Creditor and has sought to take moonshine defence in order to circumvent its obligation to liquidate such admitted debt due and payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Financial Creditor. 9. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties at length. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the Financial Creditor submitted that the amount was disbursed to the Corporate Debtor through RTGS. It is further submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. It is further argued by the Ld. Counsel for the Corporate Debtor that the memo evidencing dishonour of cheque annexed to the application as Annexure-D proves that the cause for such dishonour of cheque is instrument out-dated . This only strengthens the Corporate Debtor's case as made out in the above referred plaint that it is part of a larger transaction and the cheques were made over only for tax purposes without an intention of acknowledging of any purported loan. 12. It is further submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the Corporate Debtor during the arguments that there is no Board Resolution annexed with Form-1 of Section 7 of the Code authorizing any person to sign the petition on behalf of the Financial Creditor. It is well settled law that the application under section 7 of IBC has to be complete and non disclosure of Board Resolution would render the said application defective and bad in the eye of law. It is submitted that no Form-2 disclosing the name and required certificate from proposed Interim Resolution Professional has been annexed with the application, which is a clear violation of Rule 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
