Latest - TMI e-Newsletter
New User/ Regiser
2022 (9) TMI 542 - Insolvency & Bankruptcy
Maintainability of petition - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Operational Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - service of demand notice - time limitation - whether the demand notice in Form 3 dated 15.09.2020 was properly served? - HELD THAT:- The demand notice was sent through e-mail (Annexure G) on 17.09.2020 at the registered e-mail address of the corporate debtor as available on the master data of the MCA.
Whether the operational debt was disputed by the corporate debtor? - HELD THAT:- The petitioner/operational creditor has filed an affidavit under Section 9(3)(b) of the Code, wherein it has been deposed that the no notice was given by the corporate debtor relating to a dispute of the unpaid operational debt at any point in time. Thus, it can be inferred that there is no preexisting dispute between the parties.
Whether this application was filed within limitation? - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the case file shows that the application was filed vide Diary No.00259 on 18.02.2021 (refiled on 16.08.2021), whereas the date of default is 23.03.2020, therefore, this Adjudicating Authority finds that this application has been filed within limitation.
There is a total unpaid operational debt (in default) of ₹2,20,28,662/-. The operational creditor has provided the details of the debt due and has also annexed with the petition copy of ledger account statement, statement of accounts along with invoices and credit notes. Accordingly, the petitioner/operational creditor has established the debt and the default, which is more than Rupees one lakh i.e. the threshold limit (pre-revised) - It is noted that the corporate debtor has failed to make payment of the amount due as mentioned in the statutory notice till date. Thus, the conditions under Section 9 of the Code stand satisfied. It is evident from the above-mentioned facts that the liability of the corporate debtor is undisputed. Accordingly, the petitioner proved the debt and the default which is above threshold limit. There is no rebuttal to the claim filed by the petitioner as respondent/corporate debtor chose not to appear.
In the present petition, all the aforesaid requirements have been satisfied. It is seen that the petition preferred by the petitioner is complete in all respects. The material on record clearly goes to show that the respondent committed default in payment of the claimed operational debt even after demand made by the petitioner. In view of the satisfaction of the conditions provided for in Section 9(5)(i) of the Code, the petition is admitted.
Petition admitted - moratorium declared.