9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a moonshine defence unsupported by tangible materials/evidence. Since, the pre-existing dispute has been established, other issue is not touched upon. Petition dismissed. - C. P (IB) No. 511/KB/2020 - - - Dated:- 19-9-2022 - Shri Rohit Kapoor : Member ( Judicial ) And Shri Balraj Joshi : Member ( Technical ) For the Operational Creditor : Mr. Kuldip Mallik, Adv. : Mr. DiptomoyTalukder, Adv. : Mr. Ashok Bhowmick, Adv. For the Corporate Debtor : Mr. Sidhartha Sharma, Adv. : Mr. Arjun Asthana, Adv. : Mr. Aman Kataruka, Adv. ORDER Per Balraj Joshi , Member ( Technical ) 1. The Court convened viahybrid mode. 2. This is a Company Petition filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ( t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Aluminum XLPE Cables ( Cables ). Subsequently, the Operational Creditor supplied the cables and raised an invoice dated 23 May, 2018 for a sum of Rs.30,26,074/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Twenty Six Thousand Seventy Four only). 5.3 The cables were duly accepted and utilized by the Corporate Debtor without raising any objection. The Operational Creditor had running account with the Corporate Debtor and the Operational Creditor raised several invoices, however, the Corporate Debtor failed to clear the invoice raised on 23 May, 2018. 5.4 Thereafter, the Operational Creditor issued a statutory notice dated 14 November, 2019 under section 8 of the Code, to which reply was issued by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor. 6. Submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Page 62 of the Reply) and 09 November, 2018 (Page 63 of the Reply) to CCIL and made complaints about the quality of materials supplied against the invoice no.KCOGST1819/0292 dated 23 May, 2018. 6.6 It is pertinent to mention that Corporate Debtor had always placed purchase orders before CCIL, as it never had any intention to get into business with Operational Creditor and thus there was never any contractual relation and/ or obligation between the parties to the present application. 6.7 It is trite law that a person, not being a party to a deed is not bound by the covenants in the deed nor could it enforce the covenants and has further held that it is settled law that a person not a party to a contract subject to certain well recogn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the obligation of the Corporate Debtor to make any payment to the Operational Creditor pertaining to the goods supplied by them as a dealer of CCIL.,i.e., the party with which the Corporate Debtor had a contractual relation by virtue of the issuance of Purchase Order dated 14th May 2018(pg. 21 of reply). 6.10 Further, the balance confirmation as issued by Operational Creditor and purported to have been accepted by the Corporate Debtor(Pg. 39 of petition) has been fabricated by Operational Creditor with a mala fide intentto mislead this Adjudicating Authority. Operational Creditor has forged the signature of Corporate Debtor and affixed a forged seal in order to establish his alleged claim against Corporate Debtor, whereas, the matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to look into the complaints of Corporate Debtor; (e) Letter dated 09 March 2019 (pg. 66 of reply) where the Corporate Debtor asked CCIL. to lift the poor, substandard and inferior quality of goods supplied by their dealer/ financer, i.e, the Operational Creditor; (f) Letter dated 22 March 2019 (pg. 67 of reply) issued by CCII, wherein CCIL, accepted that Corporate Debtor is entitled to hold payment towards the poor, substandard and inferior quality of goods supplied. CCIL, in the said communication further admitted that the said fact has been duly notified to the Dealer, i.e., the Operational Creditor; (g) Letter dated 09 April 2019 (pg. 68 of reply) where the Corporate Debtor duly informed CCILthat it shall not bear any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of Sections 7 or 9 observed and held: 29. The scheme of Section 7 stands in contrast with the scheme under Section 8 where an operational creditor is, on the occurrence of a default, to first deliver a demand notice of the unpaid debt to the operational debtor in the manner provided in Section 8(1) of the Code. Under Section 8(2), the corporate debtor can, within a period of 10 days of receipt of the demand notice or copy of the invoice mentioned of a dispute or the record of the pendency of a suit or arbitration proceedings, which is preexisting- i.e. before such notice or invoice was received by the corporate debtor. The moment there is existence of such a dispute, the operational creditor gets out of the clutches of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
