TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 879X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Operational Creditor, there is no proof of service of such letter filed on record. The plea is thus unsupported by evidence. Remitting back the matter would not serve any purpose and the learned Adjudicating Authority having found the Application complete and having admitted the Application under Section 9, the Impugned Order calls for no interference on our part. Appeal dismissed. - Company Appeal (AT) (INS) No.164 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 8-5-2019 - Mr S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson, Mr A.I.S. Cheema, Member (Judicial) And Kanthi Narahari Member (Technical) For The Appellant : Shri Ramji Srinivasan, Senior Advocate with Shri Rahul Jain, Ms. Smitakshi Talukdar and Ms. Sylona Mohapatra, Advocates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the dues of Corporate Debtor. 3. The learned Adjudicating Authority considered that the Corporate Debtor had not appeared before it although proof of service had been filed. The Adjudicating Authority considered the Application under Section 9 of IBC and finding the same to be complete, proceeded to admit the same and consequential Orders were passed initiating the CIRP process. 4. Against the Impugned Order, present Appeal has been filed by the Appellant. The Appellant claims that the Operational Creditor was to supply plastic film of thickness of 12 microns but supplied film having density of 18 microns because of which, its client - Arazplast imposed penalty on the Corporate Debtor of USD 80,000 and the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Adjudicating Authority did not give Appellant a hearing, the Impugned Order shows that the Adjudicating Authority had proof of service on the Corporate Debtor. We have heard the Appellant to see if remitting back the matter would serve any purpose. Although the Appellant claims existence of a dispute and the Appeal claims that a letter like Annexure A5 dated 23rd December, 2017 was sent to the Operational Creditor, there is no proof of service of such letter filed on record. The plea is thus unsupported by evidence. When the Operational Creditor has in Reply Affidavit denied receipt of any such letter, the Appellant is unable to show pre-existing dispute. In the circumstances, remitting back the matter would not serve any purpose and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
