9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 1222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mediately rush to deposit the cheques. The cheques when ultimately deposited got dis-honoured. There are no reason why the Application as filed by the Operational Creditor should not be allowed. On the face of the record, the Corporate Debtor is unable to clear its dues. Now, when the unlock periods are going on, still the Corporate Debtor is not in a position to say that the debt will be paid by a particular date. Though learned Counsel for Original Appellant for Corporate Debtor seeks one more opportunity to pay and claiming that Annexure-R3 of Reply shows it had moved Mentioning Application to extend time to pay, no sincerity to pay ₹ 1.46 Crores is demonstrated. Again, in a settlement between parties, this Tribunal will not on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en the parties and accordingly, the Appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. In paragraph-12 of the order dated 13.03.2020, liberty was granted to the Applicant to approach this Tribunal in case of any default by the Appellant in honouring the MoU. The Applicant claims that as per the MoU dated 12.03.2020, 18 (eighteen) post-dated cheques were given to the Applicant and the Appellant undertook to honour all the eighteen cheques. The Applicant says that due to lockdown, Mr. Rajesh Nagpal requested the Applicant to wait for some time for depositing the cheques and the Applicant had agreed with the condition that all the cheques will be honoured by May, 2020. The Applicant further states that although the Applicant accommodated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... another on 31.08.2020 for ₹ 10 lakhs. Learned Counsel for the Applicant is submitting that the Corporate Debtor has no intention to clear the debt of the Operational Creditor and that considering the default and noncompliance of the order of this Tribunal, the Appeal should be dismissed restoring the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. 7. Learned Counsel for the Appellant- Corporate Debtor is referring to various difficulties being faced by the Corporate Debtor and the Appellant- Rajesh Nagpal submits that one more opportunity may be given to the Corporate Debtor to clear the debt of the Applicant/Operational Creditor. 8. We had passed the order dated 13.03.2020 accepting the settlement. In paragraphs 11 to 13 we had ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d got dis-honoured. 10. In view of the directions we had recorded in paragraph-12 of our order reproduced above, we find no reason why the Application as filed by the Operational Creditor should not be allowed. On the face of the record, the Corporate Debtor is unable to clear its dues. Now, when the unlock periods are going on, still the Corporate Debtor is not in a position to say that the debt will be paid by a particular date. Though learned Counsel for Original Appellant for Corporate Debtor seeks one more opportunity to pay and claiming that Annexure-R3 of Reply shows it had moved Mentioning Application to extend time to pay, no sincerity to pay ₹ 1.46 Crores is demonstrated. Again, in a settlement between parties, this Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
