TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such claim cannot lie under section 9 of the Code. This Company Petition is complete in all respects as mentioned u/s 8 and 9 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payment - petition admitted. - C.P. No. 1570/IB/2017 - - - Dated:- 20-11-2018 - Shri V. P. Singh, Member (Judicial) And Shri Ravikumar Duraisamy, Member (Technical) For The Operational Creditor : Vishal Mughlikar, Counsel and Ms. Smriti Jha For The Corporate Debtor : Mr. Gaurangi Patil i/b. Sujay Joshi ORDER Per V. P. Singh, Member (Judicial) It is a Company Petition filed u/s 9 of Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by the Operational Creditor against the Corporate Debtor stating that the Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payment of ₹16,48,721.98/-, in view of the same, this Company Petition is filed for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor. 2. The case of this Operational Creditor is a Private Limited Company incorporated on 08.06.1989 and engaged in the business of providing quality logistics for all k ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. 3.9.2016 856746 10,00,000 2 Trimurti Corns Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. 5.9.2016 856747 10,00,000 3 Trimurti Corns Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. 7.9.2016 856748 05,00,000 4 Trimurti Corns Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. 10.0.2016 856749 10,00,000 5 Trimurti Corns Agro Foods Pvt.Ltd. 15.0.2016 856750 10,00,000 6 Mrunmaha Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. 15.10.2016 056229 1,67,815 5 . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the Corporate Debtor on 03.06.2017 establish that there is an admitted operational debt on the part of the Corporate Debtor based on invoices raised by the Operational Creditor. However, the Corporate Debtor has failed to discharge its admitted liability and as such is unable to pay its debts. To evident that this payment has not been made, the Operational Creditor has also filed Bank Certificate along with the copy of Company Petition and along with Section 8 notice dated 29.5.2017 demanding payment as reflected in the invoice, and for no payment has been made even after the receipt of this notice, the Petitioner filed this case against the Corporate Debtor. 9. The Counsel for the Corporate Debtor states that the Corporate Debtor is a Company incorporated and formed under the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 (earlier known as Companies Act, 1956) dealing in import/ export of Farm produce including fruits and vegetables and that the Operational Creditor is engaged into the business of facilitation of Export Import facilities including Freight Forwarding and acting as a Clearance and Forwarding Agent for the Corporate Debtor. According to Corporate Debtor Und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Operational Creditor resulted into heavy losses to the Corporate Debtor. 12. The Counsel for the Corporate Debtor submits that the Operational Creditor has been responsible to provide all the end to end facilitation regarding the Clearing the Goods of the Corporate Debtor and effecting the same to be loaded into the ship to sail. The letter received by Mr. Ahmed Gamal Saleh Qasem, proprietor of Walid Ahmed Al Yahafi for Trading Establishment, Saudi Arabia from Corporate Debtor. It clearly states that there has been losses due to delay in delivery of documents causing detention/ demurrage to be paid to Port Authorities in Saudi Arabia in the year 2015 and 2016 amounting to a total USD 37,544/- (US Dollars Thirty Seven Thousand Five hundred Forty Four only). 13. The Corporate Debtor submits that it had to compensate an amount of USD 4000/- (US Dollars Four thousand only) in a settlement due to the deficiency in performance of the Operational Creditor, due to which the goods to be sold to the customer of the Corporate Debtor at their respective port. The Corporate Debtor further submits that there are other similar issues where the delay in issuan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a dispute is pending between the parties. Therefore, all that the adjudicating authority is to see at this stage is whether there is a plausible contention which requires further investigation and that the dispute is not a patently feeble legal argument or an assertion of fact unsupported by evidence. It is important to separate the grain from the chaff and to reject a spurious defense which is mere bluster. However, in doing so, the Court does not need to be satisfied that the defense is likely to succeed. The Court does not at this stage examine the merits of the dispute except to the extent indicated above. So long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudicating authority has to reject the application. 17. On perusal of this Company Petition and the documents thereof, this Bench has observed that this Company Petition is complete in all respects as mentioned u/s 8 and 9 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payment of ₹16,48,721.98/-, as on 28.04.2017, after receiving of Demand Notice no dispute has been raised, henceforth it is hereby admitted with reliefs as follows ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
