TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was raised for the first time only after notice under section 8 of IBC was issued. None of the defences taken by the corporate debtor stands the test of proving any pre existing dispute. They are only statements made by Corporate Debtor but not even single objection is substantiated with any proof in support of evidence. Thus, it can be concluded that the dispute raised by the corporate debtor, is spurious, plainly frivolous, vexatious and does not categorize a genuine dispute as reproduced above and the contention of the corporate debtor, of a pre-existing dispute without any evidence and merit is a clear after though to defeat the claim of the applicant. The date of default is 12-9-2018 and the present application is filed on 05/0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rney dated 16-7-2018,copy annexed with a prayer to initiate the Corporate Insolvency process against Lemon Electronics Limited (for brevity 'Corporate Debtor'). 2. The Applicant is a company incorporated in Hong Kong under the Companies Ordinance (Chapter 32 of the Laws of Hong Kong) having its registered office at 20F, Champion Building 287-291, Des Voeux Road Central, Sheung Wan Hong Kong and is limited company having a sole director. The name and address of person resident in India authorized to accept service of process on its behalf is Mr. Sandeep Kumar, resident of V.P.O Chhawala, South west Delhi-110071.The applicant deals in variety of goods such as memory cards, micro cards, storage devices and also steel products, Kitch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are exactly as per the description. Applicant states that no complaint was received with respect to goods from corporate debtor. It is further submitted by the applicant that six invoices were raised for the goods supplied and the said invoices issued by the applicant to the corporate debtor were duly sent and received by the accounts officer of the corporate debtor by giving proper acknowledgement and confirmation on phone. Also, assurance was received from the corporate debtor that the payment shall be released soon. 6. It is stated that the applicant had requested for payment of said invoices and sent reminder but the corporate debtor failed to honour its obligation. The applicant further submits that the corporate debtor never compl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate of filling of application which is due and payable by the corporate debtor to the applicant. 11. The Corporate Debtor filed reply and submitted the following : (a) No default has occurred and therefore the provisions of the code cannot be triggered. (b) The corporate debtor contended that all invoices in question were not sent to Corporate Debtor by applicant and never raised any demand for payment towards supply of goods, hence the said application is liable to be rejected as the applicant failed to deliver the invoices to the corporate debtor. (c) There exists a pre-existing dispute between the parties in respect of the goods supplied and goods to be deficient and defective. (d) There exists no written agreement between ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erit in the so-called dispute raised by the corporate debtor as mere reply without document filed by the corporate debtor to the present application, is unable to establish any pre-existing dispute of genuine nature. This leaves no doubt that the default has occurred for the payment of the operational debt of the applicant and the so called dispute raised by the corporate debtor is merely a moonshine dispute as laid down in Mobilox Innovations (P.) Ltd. v. Kirusa Software (P.) Ltd. [2017] 144 SCL 37 (SC) 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 u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Applicant has named Mr. Umesh Garg, having email address umeshg60@gmail.com,mob : 9818990001 and office at 2nd Floor, 3 Scindia House, Janpath, New Delhi-110001,who is registered vide registration number IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00135/2017-18/10277 as the Interim Resolution Professional who is hereby appointed as IRP, subject to the condition that no disciplinary proceedings are pending against such an IRP named who may act as an IRP in relation to the CIRP of the Respondent. The specific consent has been filed in Form 2 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rule, 2016 and disclosures as required under IBBI (insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 have been made. 20. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
