9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... presentative of the respondent - There is nothing on record to establish the fact that the respondent ever made any demand of supply of the bricks etc. to the applicant herein. These all facts shows that the bill raised is forged and fabricated to make out false ground to put the respondent under CIRP. These all act and omissions on the part of the applicant and respondent clearly shows that there is an active collusion between them to defraud the other creditors and to facilitate the respondent to enjoy the rigors of the IBC Code. Further, had there been any genuine admission on the part of the respondent, respondent might have paid the disputed amount despite the fact the said petition is pending before this Tribunal year and alleged amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l works including digging of earth, M-Sand Truck, stone, water tankers, cement bags and labour supply. b. It in the present case corporate debtor approached operational creditor for the supply of various materials and civil works to execute part of job for the Project work at the project cite. c. Further during the above said period, the operational creditor provided the said materials and labours and also carried out civil works for ₹ 1,66,680/-. d. The operational creditor sent various reminders, follow ups to which the corporate debtor failed to release the outstanding payment of ₹ 1,86,900.8/-. e. The operational creditor sent a Demand Notice dated 31.12.2019 demanding payment of an unpaid operational deb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, the Corporate Debtor, in the absence of requisite funds, could not pursue the project further and the entire plan became stand still. e. The corporate debtor further stated in his reply that they are willing to make the payment and also to assign further works to the operational creditor, once the project of the corporate debtor kick starts. 5. We have heard the arguments of Ld. Counsels for the applicant and the respondents and perused the case records. From the bare perusal of the file it can be inferred that admittedly there is no agreement entered into between parties submitted for supply of building material despite the fact both the applicant is alleged to have been dealing in supply of building material, whereas, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
