TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 368X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relating to 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 required 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. The dispute raised by the corporate debtor, is spurious, plainly frivolous and unable to categorize as genuine dispute as reproduced above. Hence, contention of the corporate debtor, of a pre existing dispute without any evidence and merit is a clear after thought to defeat the claim of the applicant - The date of default is 11.09.2019 and the present application is filed on 09.10.2019. Hence the application is not time barred and filed within the period of limitation. The Applicant has filed an affidavit in compliance of section 9(3)(b) which is placed on record - The present application is filed on the Performa prescribed under Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , which was in the form of a work order for execution of certain work at the site of the corporate debtor. In terms of the said work order, the applicant was mandated to carry out work in the nature of under Ground Tank, Sewer Treatment Plant, Sewage Drainage Civil Work at the corporate office of the corporate debtor. The work order was fixed for a total amount of ₹ 17,59,68,574/-(Rupees Seventeen Crores Fifty Nine Lakh Sixty Eight).The copy of agreement dated 03.01.2019 has been annexed herein. 5. The applicant submitted that after execution of work order as per the agreement, three running account bills dated 29.03.2019, 30.03.2019 and 25.04.2019 ( hereinafter referred to as RA Bills ) were raised to the corporate debtor for payment. The bills were duly verified by the project manager as per the measurement sheets of the applicants and after finalization of the amounts claimed there under, the said RA bills were duly received by the Authorized Signatory of the corporate debtor and approved for an amount of ₹ 34,081,24,52/-. The said approved and signed bills along with measurement sheets have been annexed herein. Consequently, the applicant made several reminders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the copy of measurement bill maintaining the account of work performed by the applicant. The applicant submits that an email dated 22.04.2019 has been placed on record, which shows the communication between the official of corporate debtor and the applicant, wherein discussion regarding the format of the bill and correct GSTIN no. is being made, which clearly shows that work had been performed by the applicant. The applicant has relied upon the order passed by the Hon'ble NCLAT, in the matter of Alloysmin Industries Vs. Raman Casting Pvt. Ltd Appeal (AT) Insolvency No.684/2018 in support of the contention that service of Section 8 notice at the corporate office of the corporate debtor shall be treated as valid service. 10. Considering the documents on records and submissions of counsels, it manifests that the corporate debtor has tried to create and establish a preexisting dispute by asserting that the services had never been performed. Further, the corporate debtor has also raised contentions with regards to maintainability of the present application and sufficient proof to substantiate the contentions have not been provided. No documentary evidence or correspondence is p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation it can be concluded that the dispute raised by the corporate debtor, is spurious, plainly frivolous and unable to categorize as genuine dispute as reproduced above. Hence, contention of the corporate debtor, of a pre existing dispute without any evidence and merit is a clear after thought to defeat the claim of the applicant. 12. The date of default is 11.09.2019 and the present application is filed on 09.10.2019. Hence the application is not time barred and filed within the period of limitation. 13. The registered office of corporate debtor is situated in Delhi and therefore this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain and try this application. 14. The Applicant has filed an affidavit in compliance of section 9(3)(b) which is placed on record. 15. The present application is filed on the Performa prescribed under Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 r/w Section 9 of the code and is complete. The applicant is entitled to claim its dues, establishing the default in payment of the operational debt. Hence, the application is admitted. 16. As a consequence of applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
