TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 2136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HELD THAT:- There was no dispute in existence prior to the 1st demand notice issued under Section 8(1) of the I B Code and the Corporate Debtor disputed the claim about quality only after issuance of 1st demand notice, therefore, after withdrawal of 1st application under Section 9 on technical grounds and issuance of fresh demand notice, the application under Section 9 filed by Respondent was main ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rim Resolution Profession the present appeal has been preferred by Mr. Dinesh Gupta, Director of the Corporate Debtor. 2. The main plea taken by the Appellant is that there was an existence of dispute between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor. However, such plea taken by the Appellant was disputed by the Respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the Appellant was asked to refer to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 8(1) issued through advocate was not permissible, which has now been reversed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. In view of earlier decision of this Appellate Tribunal, the Operational Creditor withdrawn his application under Section 9 and again issued demand notice under Section 8(1) on the Corporate Debtor. Thereby we find that the letter dated 30.08.2017 was written by Corporate Debtor b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
