9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he support of the Bank Statements and other record that the value of the supplies made by the Petitioner were paid back, there are no merit in the contention of the Petitioner. The Petitioner failed to substantiate its contention with regard to any understanding between the parties that it can adjust certain amount out of the payments made by the Respondent towards the payments required to be made by another legal entity which is a Firm by the name, M/s. RMM Food Products. This Adjudicating Authority, in a summary procedure like the CIRP under the IBC, 2016 cannot conduct a trial into these disputed issues. Petition dismissed. - C.P. (IB) No. 205/BB/2020 - - - Dated:- 1-2-2022 - Ajay Kumar Vatsavayi, Member (J) And Manoj Kumar Dubey, Member (T) For the Appellant : S. Ravi, Adv For the Respondents : Gaurav Mandappa, Adv ORDER Ajay Kumar Vatsavayi, Member (J) 1. The present Petition is filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'IBC/Code') read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 by M/s. Sicagen India Limited (hereinafter referred to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rporate Debtor fails to make the payment within the due date, then interest @ 25% per annum shall be charged on the amount due computed from the due date till the date of payments. 6. Despite the said terms, the Corporate Debtor was in a habit of paying the invoice amounts with huge delay. The Operational Creditor raised a total of 82 invoices against the Corporate Debtor during the course of business for the value of material supplied and the same have been promptly served on the Corporate Debtor. The total value of Invoices is for ₹ 1,20,76,611/- out of which, the Corporate Debtor paid an amount of ₹ 73,93,203/- on various dates from August 2012 to June 2017 and the balance amount of ₹ 46,83,408/- is still pending. It is stated that the last payment was made on 08.06.2017. When the Operational Creditor demanded for payment of balance amount, the Corporate Debtor requested for some more time to pay the same, but had never paid a single rupee to the Operational Creditor, and thus stated that all its efforts to recover the admitted debt amount had gone in vain. 7. The Operational Creditor vide its letter dated 14.12.2017 had accepted a proposal for one time f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2011 to 25.08.2014. Certificate of Payments from Canara Bank, which are placed on record as Annexure III, IV, V respectively, demonstrate that the entire sale consideration has been paid by the Respondent to M/s. Beta Industries and there is no amount due from the Respondent to M/s. Beta Industries and that the transactions in question were between M/s. Beta Industries and the Respondent. It is claimed that M/s. Beta Industries is a Division of the Applicant. (c) The Respondent is a Company engaged in the business of exporting processed food products such as mango pulp, guava pulp, etc. These items are placed in 215 Kg aseptic bags which are in turn placed inside MS barrels/drums for the purpose of export. In order to procure the said drums, the Respondent approached M/s. Beta Industries. In this regard, an order was placed and the Applicant supplied 10,401 MS Drums for a total sale consideration of ₹ 1,20,76,611/- for the period 04.05.2011 to 18.08.2011. (d) It is contended that the Respondent has consistently faced issues of poor quality in relation to the said MS Barrels and when the same were raised by the Respondent, the representatives of Beta Industries assur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and quality issues. The Petitioner has given acceptance letter on 14.12.2017 to the Respondent willing to accept one time settlement of ₹ 20 lakhs against the total due. However, the Respondent did not take steps to settle the amount, and there was no commitment from Respondent side from December 2017 to October 2019. Upon its failure, the Petitioner issued demand notice on 04.11.2019. If there are no outstanding dues payable to the Petitioner, the Respondent should have objected within 10 days after receipt of the demand notice under Section 8 of IBC, 2016. The Respondent never sent any objection, but came forward for one time settlement. After filing the Petition, the Respondent is now trying to prove that there are no outstanding dues payable to the Petitioner and avoiding to pay the legitimate claim of the Petitioner by submitting a bank certificate with selective payment details matching nearly the total amount payable to the Petitioner. 11. The Respondent vide its written arguments dated 22.12.2021 has inter alia submitted that in order to further substantiate the payment of total sale consideration, the Respondent vide Memo dated 24.02.2021 inter alia placed on reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be dismissed. 13. Heard Shri S. Ravi, learned Counsel for the Applicant and Shri Gaurav Mandappa, learned Counsel for the Respondent and carefully perused the pleadings on record. 14. It is the specific case of the Petitioner that it has supplied materials to the Respondent for a total value of ₹ 1,20,76,611/- and out of which the Respondent paid only ₹ 73,93,203/- till 08.06.2017 and since the Respondent failed to repay the balance amount, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process proceedings are liable to be initiated against the Respondent. On the other hand, it is the specific case of the Respondent that it has paid the entire value of ₹ 1,20,76,611/- to the Petitioner and hence there is nothing to pay further. 15. It is seen from the record that the Respondent has paid the entire cost of the supplies made by the Petitioner. The Petitioner while not denying the same, however submits that, out of the total amount of ₹ 1,20,76,611/-, it has adjusted only ₹ 73,93,203/- towards the liability of the Respondent and whereas the balance amount was adjusted against the liabilities of a Partnership Firm by name, M/s. RMM Food Products, in which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
