9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) claiming a default of Rs. 9,05,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Five Thousand Only) for the services rendered by the Applicant to the Corporate Debtor during the period of employment of the Applicant . 2. This application is filed by Mr Vishal Jain, the Chartered Accountant of the Applicant being duly authorised, vide Letter of Authority dated 30-11-2018, which is annexed to the Application. 3. The Applicant submits that he was appointed as the Head of Sales and Marketing- Rice Division (Grade-National Sales Head B-1) on a pay scale of Rs. 36,00,000/- per annum vide appointment letter dated 11-4-2016. Copy of the appointment letter is annexed to the application. 4. The Applicant resigned from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application. 8. The Applicant has filed an affidavit in compliance of section 9(3)(b) of the Code, dated 23-11-2018, stating that the applicant has received an invalid notice of dispute by the Corporate Debtor and has further stated that the Corporate Debtor has not made any payments towards the outstanding dues. 9. The Corporate Debtor responded to the Demand Notice dated 12-11-2018 vide reply dated 23-11-2018. The Corporate Debtor in its reply has attempted to deny the due amounts on flimsy and spurious grounds. The said reply appears to be an afterthought, just to create a defence, on receiving the Demand Notice. The Corporate Debtor has failed to point out a pre-existing dispute about the services received from the applicant. Copy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 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 authority does not need to be satisfied that the defence is likely to succeed so long as the dispute is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudicating authority has to reject the application. Moreover the existence of the dispute and/or the suit or arbitration proceeding must be pre-existing i.e. It must exist before the receipt of the demand notice or invoice" 14. In the light of the decision mentioned supra, and the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... below: I. That this Bench as a result of this prohibits: (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; (c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any activity under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; (d) the recovery of any property by an o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
