TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... replying thereto. If a company had squared off a transaction by payment in the year 2010, if would defy logic and reason that it would receive the statutory notice demanding payment in respect of such transaction but would not reply thereto. The company's affidavit makes out a simplistic story of some person in the company having questioned the petitioner or an associate and it having been agreed between such persons that the statutory notice would not be proceeded with. The explanation by the company as to why the statutory notice was not replied to, is not worthy of belief. It is elementary that an arbitration clause does not stand in the way of a company petition being filed or being adjudicated on merits. In any event, the agreement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner issued a further demand of October 8, 2011 claiming the balance amount of Rs.62 lakh within a week from the date of issuance of the letter along with interest thereon. The letter dated October 8, 2011 is annexure 'D' to the petition and is referred to at paragraph 20 of the body of the petition. Paragraph 20 of the petition is dealt with in the affidavit-in-opposition at paragraph 13(a). The company has asserted in its affidavit that the allegations in paragraph 20 are irrelevant and "totally beside the point." However, the validity of the demand of October 8, 2011 has not been questioned nor has the company disputed the fact that it received such demand. The company appears to have affixed its rubber stamp on the copy of the demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oned document of September 22, 2010 is at variance with the impression of the petitioner's rubber stamp in the documents elsewhere, the company's defence appears to be without basis and the petitioner appears to be justified in his assertion that the company has fabricated the document or brought the same into existence for the purpose of resisting this claim. There is a further tell-tale sign of the company having no defence to the claim in the company having received the statutory notice and not replying thereto. If a company had squared off a transaction by payment in the year 2010, if would defy logic and reason that it would receive the statutory notice demanding payment in respect of such transaction but would not reply thereto. The c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore Court at the post-advertisement stage on the first available working day after the expiry of four weeks from the date of the publications being made. Publication in the Official Gazette will stand dispensed with. In the event the security is furnished and contemporaneous intimation thereof is issued by advocate representing the company to advocate representing the petitioner within three days of the security being furnished with the Registrar, Original Side, the claim of the petitioning creditor will stand relegated to a regular action, be it a suit or by way of an arbitral reference. In the event, however, the security is furnished and an intimation thereof is given to advocate representing the petitioner but no suit is lodged or arb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
