9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orporate Insolvency Resolution Process of M/s Agrawal Structure Mills (P) Ltd. 2. The respondent M/s Agrawal Structure Mills (P) Ltd. is a private company limited by shares, registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, bearing CIN: U27106CT1995PTC010147. 3. This application was originally filed before NCLT, Mumbai Bench numbered as CP (IB) No. 2348/MB/2018. After the constitution of NCLT, Cuttack Bench, the matter was transferred and re-numbered as TP No. 100/CTB/2019. 4. The Registered Office of the Corporate Debtor is situated at Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Hence, this Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction to entertain this petition. 5. The transactions are of the year 2016 & 2017. The application was filed on 20.06.2018. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only). The outstanding amount includes Rs. 305,809/- as debt due and Rs. 67,506/- towards interest @ 18 % per annum on the debt for the period starting from the dates on which the debt fell due to April, 2018. The Corporate Debtor has raised dispute against each and every Invoice. Hence, there is pre-existing disputes between the parties. 9. We have perused the application, reply and the documents filed in this case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that existence of undisputed debt is sine qua non of initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. v. Equipment Conductors & Cables Ltd. [2018] 98 taxmann.com 375/150 SCL 447 (SC) is as follows '34. Therefore, the Adjudi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng 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 defence which is mere bluster. However, in doing so, the Court does not need to be satisfied that the defence 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. & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
