TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 22,54,660). According to the first respondent out of the said amount a sum of ₹ 16,95,000 had been paid by the corporate debtor and the last amount paid in March, 2014. According to the first respondent with a view to recover the balance amount of ₹ 5,59,660 a Summary Suit No. 217 of 2014 was filed in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), A. Mirzapur, Ahmedabad-I wherein ex parte decree was passed against the corporate debtor on October 19, 2016 for ₹ 5,59,660 with simple interest at 8 per cent. per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of its realization - Thereafter, the amount having not paid the demand notice in Form 3 under section 8(1) was issued on February 15, 2017 followed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of moratorium and appointed interim resolution professional . 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the impugned judgment dated February 18, 2019 and order dated February 22, 2019 have been passed by the Adjudicating Authority ex parte without giving adequate notice and without hearing the corporate debtor . It was submitted that the application was filed on October 9, 2017 being C. P. (IB) No. 92/Chd/Pb/2017 which was withdrawn by the operational creditor on technical grounds with liberty to approach again. The operational creditor after removing the defects, second time filed the application under section 9 of the I and B Code on March 16, 2018. In the said case, the corporate debtor appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that the demand notice was issued to the corporate debtor on October 15, 2018 vide Speed Post No. EP50908592IN and the service of notice was reported by India Post as recorded while order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority on February 18, 2019 and February 22, 2019. 7. It was further submitted that the appellant issued demand notice under section 8(1) of the I and B Code but no dispute was ever raised by the corporate debtor . 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent while raised question of limitation in preferring the appeal, orders having issued on February 18, 2019 and February 22, 2019 but as certified copies of both the orders were issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary 18, 2019 and followed by order dated February 22, 2019. 12. From the record, we find that the first respondent raised Invoice No. 550, dated October 11, 2011 for ₹ 9,60,841 ; Invoice No. 785, dated December 21, 2011 for ₹ 8,43,795 and Invoice No. 885, dated January 20, 2011 for ₹ 4,50,024 (total ₹ 22,54,660). According to the first respondent out of the said amount a sum of ₹ 16,95,000 had been paid by the corporate debtor and the last amount paid in March, 2014. According to the first respondent with a view to recover the balance amount of ₹ 5,59,660 a Summary Suit No. 217 of 2014 was filed in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), A. Mirzapur, Ahmedabad-I wherein ex parte decree wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
