9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 868X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of the respondent corporate debtor and withdrew the earlier petition. The respondent itself made promise and therefore is now estopped from raising objection against the present petition. Time limitation - HELD THAT:- The respondent itself in its reply has admitted the fact of making partial payments to the applicant even in the year 2018. The same fact was also recorded in the order dated 12.04.2019 passed by this Tribunal. Therefore, fresh cause of actions were started from the each date of payments made by respondent in terms of Section 19 of the Limitation Act. Hence, the application is not time barred and the judgments relied upon by the respondent corporate debtor is not applicable. The present petition is allowed initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor - moratorium declared. - IB No. 2032/ND/2019 - - - Dated:- 10-3-2022 - Dharminder Singh, Member (J) And Sumita Purkayastha, Member (T) ORDER Dharminder Singh, Member (J) 1. The present Petition is filed under the Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter, The Code) read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions against the admission of the present petition: a) It is alleged that the amount claimed by the applicant is time barred in accordance with the provision of Section 238A of the Code. As the period of more than 3 years stands lapsed from the date of the invoice mentioned by the Applicant i.e. 2013-2015. The corporate debtor argued that since the said petition has been filed clearly after the expiration of the period of 3 years from the date when the right to sue occurs, the instant petition is legally untenable. b) Corporate Debtor also stated that the instant application is not in accordance with the provisions of the IBC as certified under Section 9(3)(C) of IBC, 2016 i.e. that the applicant failed to annex a copy of the certificate from the financial institutions, which maintains accounts of the Operational Creditor. c) The corporate debtor stated that it has already made a payment of ₹ 24,50,000/- to the Applicant and there is no amount which is due and payable to the Applicant. 8. The petitioner has filed rejoinder to the reply of respondent and submitted as follows: a) It is submitted that the limitation issued raised by the Corporate Debtor in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r intending that it would be acted upon by the other party to whom the promise is made and it is in fact so acted upon by the other party, the promise would be binding on the party making it and he would not be entitled to go back upon it. Similarly, in the present matter the applicant withdrew the earlier filed petition on a promise made by corporate debtor. The corporate debtor also promised that the it would have no objection against initiation of insolvency proceedings in case of any failure to adhere terms of the agreement. 13. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Gyarsi Rai and Others vs Dhansukh Lal and Others, it was held that: To invoke the doctrine of estoppel three conditions must be satisfied: (1) representation by a person to another, (2) the other shall have acted upon the said representation, and (3) such action shall have been detrimental to the interests of the person to whom the representation has been made. 14. In the present case also the applicant has acted upon the promise of the respondent corporate debtor and withdrew the earlier petition. The respondent itself made promise and therefore is now estopped from raising objection agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Interim Resolution Professional namely, Mr. Rahul Jain to meet out the expense to perform the functions assigned to him in accordance with regulation 6 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Person) Regulations, 2016. The needful shall be done within one week from the date of receipt of this order by the Operational Creditor. The amount however be subject to adjustment by the Committee of Creditors, as accounted for by Interim Resolution Professional, and shall be paid back to the Operational Creditor. 19. In pursuance of Section 13(2) of the Code, we direct that public announcement shall be made by the Interim Resolution Professional immediately (3 days as prescribed by Explanation to Regulation 6(1) of the IBBI Regulations, 2016) with regard to admission of this application under Section 9 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 20. We also declare moratorium in terms of Section 14 of the Code. The necessary consequences of imposing the moratorium flows from the provisions of Section 14(1) (a), (b), (c) (d) of the Code. Thus, the following prohibitions are imposed: (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
