9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of debt and due payable to operational creditors, or not - HELD THAT:- In reply to the Demand Notice, the Corporate Debtor admitted that on 12.04.2019 an amount of ₹ 17,38,397/- was due and payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor towards the transport charges. In para-8 of the additional affidavit in reply, the Corporate Debtor contended that it has offered the Operational Creditor a sum of ₹ 12,38,397/- towards full and final settlement. If according to the Corporate Debtor, nothing was due and payable by it to the Operational Creditor then for what it has offered above amount towards settlement? The Corporate Debtor has no reply. It appears from evidence on record that there may be dispute about the actual amount due and payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor but one fact is proved from the evidence on record that the Corporate Debtor has to pay a sum of Rupees more than One Lakh (as per threshold limit of ₹ 1,00,000/- under Section-4 of the IBC, prior to the Notification dated 24.03.2020) to the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor has committed default in paying the sum in spite of receipt of Demand Notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear the outstanding amount. Hence, on 22.04.2019 the Operational Creditor served Demand Notice under Section 8 of IBC to the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor replied to the notice raising falls defence therein and did not clear the debt. Hence, this application is filed to initiate the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor under Section 9 of the IBC. (iii) The Corporate Debtor has been served the notice of this application. One of its authorized representatives, Mr. Dilip Kumar Yadav, appeared in the proceeding. He filed affidavit in reply. (iv) In para-7 of the affidavit in reply, the Corporate Debtor contended that the Operational Creditor failed to perform and comply with the terms and conditions of the work order. In para-8, it is contended that the Corporate Debtor has totally paid a sum of ₹ 51,28,140/- to the Operational Creditor. Again in para-11 of the affidavit in reply, the Corporate Debtor contended that an email dated 12.04.2019 the Operational Creditor claimed an outstanding amount of ₹ 43,38,500/-. In para-13, it is contended that an amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- was paid through RTGS to the Operational Creditor. The Corporate Debtor gave details of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d received Demand Notice dated 04.04.2019 (Annexure-6). It is also not in dispute that the Corporate Debtor replied the same (Annexure-8). The Corporate Debtor in para-5 of its reply to demand notice stated that final outstanding amount payable to the Operational Creditor as on 12.04.2019 is ₹ 17,38,397/- . This notice reply does not speak about any pre-existing dispute relating to deficiency of service as has been raised as a defence in additional affidavit in reply by the Corporate Debtor. We hold that such defence being after thought cannot be considered. Moreover, there is absolutely no material evidence produced by the Corporate Debtor on record to substantiate its defence relating to deficiency of service, etc. We reject this defence in toto. 8. The second defence of the Corporate Debtor raised against the claim that nothing is due and payable by it to the Operational Creditor. But there are number of documents produced by the Operational Creditor as well as the Corporate Debtor to show the futility of this defence. In reply to the Demand Notice, the Corporate Debtor admitted that on 12.04.2019 an amount of ₹ 17,38,397/- was due and payable by the Corporate De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntinuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor. 3) The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of this order till the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process or until this Adjudicating Authority approves the Resolution Plan under sub-section (1) of the Section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of Corporate Debtor Company under Section 33 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the case may be. 4) We hereby appoint Mr. Mukesh Verma, having ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
