TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 673X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the filing of this application is observed. This Adjudicating Authority is satisfied that: (a) Existence of debt is above ₹ 1 lakh. (b) Debt is due and defaulted. (c) Default has started from on August 23, 2016 to August 27, 2016. (d) The petition has been filed within the limitation period as the date of default is August 23, 2016 and the petition has been filed on September 30, 2018, i. e., within three years of the default. (e) Copy of the application filed before the Tribunal has been sent to the corporate debtor, and the application filed by the petitioner under section 9 of the IBC is found to be complete for the purpose of initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process against the corporate debtor. Petition admitted - moratorium declared. - C. P. (IB) No. 587 / 9 /NCLT/AHM/ 2018 - - - Dated:- 27-5-2020 - HARIHAR PRAKASH CHATURVEDI (Judicial Member) and PRASANTA KUMAR MOHANTY (Technical Member) Harmish K. Shah for the petitioner/operational creditor. None appeared for the respondent/corporate debtor. ORDER The present petition has been preferred by the operational creditor SGV Foils P. Ltd., under section 9 of the Ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n respect of the same. 6. It is submitted that there has been a running account of the respondent- corporate debtor in the books of petitioners. The purchase orders were issued by the respondent-corporate debtor from time to time and induction wad was duly supplied by the petitioner in furtherance of said purchase orders. Separate tax invoices were raised by the petitioner for each delivery. The respondent has made part payments in respect of said invoices and the first of said invoices as raised by the petitioner against the corporate debtor, is dated December 11, 2015 and for ₹ 1,12,254 and last invoice raised by the petitioner against the supply of operational goods to the respondent was dated July 27, 2016 for and amount of ₹ 2,93,817. 7. It is submitted that no payment was received against said outstanding in the month of August to November. The petitioner requested the respondent number of times and therefore an amount of ₹ 2,00,000 was received (in 2 tranches of ₹ 1 lakh each) in December, 2017. 8. It is submitted that the petitioner was continuously following the respondent-corporate debtor telephonically as well as through e-mails. It is st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,09,000 13. It is subm itted that the last payment of ₹ 25,000 was made on December 16, 2017. It was assured that the above cheques would never bounce and shall be duly honoured at the time of presentation. However, the aforesaid cheques were returned unpaid in spite of the assurance and thus the settlement failed. Thus the debt fell due back from the date when the goods were supplied to the respondent and the said invoices were raised. The details of the said invoices are mentioned hereinunder : Sl. No. Invoice No. Invoice date Due date Outstanding amount in (Rs.) 1. 411 23-6-2016 23-8-2016 1,19,169 2. 472 6-7-2016 6-9-2016 83,653 3. 479 8-7-2016 8-9-2016 1,50,653 4. 535 18-7-2016 18-9-2016 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ember 3, 2019, December 17, 2019 and December 18, 2019. In spite of sufficient opportunities none appeared on the behalf of respondent in any hearing date. 21. The matter was finally heard on December 18, 2019. During the arguments, learned counsel for the operational creditor has submitted that the petition may be admitted and an interim resolution professional appointed in accordance with the provisions of section 16 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Further, it is submitted that the petition may be admitted for initiating the corporate insolvency resolution process as per section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the moratorium period may also be declared. 22. Further, the operational creditor has not suggested any name of an interim resolution professional ( IRP for short). If, this I. B. petition is admitted, an IRP needs to be appointed. 23. It is observed that : 23.1 The application has been filed on August 30, 2018 for operational debt due and defaulted amount is ₹ 12,11,305. 23.2 Invoices are of June 23, 2016, July 6, 2016, July 8, 2016, July 18, 2016 and July 27, 2016. 23.3 Date of default starts from August 23, 2016 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... financial sector regulator. (IV) The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of this order till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process. 26. The petitioner/operational creditor has not suggested the name of any interim resolution professional in the present petition. Though it is not mandatory on the part of the applicant to propose and interim resolution professional when the application is filed under section 9 of the IBC, 2016, but in that case, the Adjudicating Authority shall appoint an insolvency professional from the panel prepared by the IBBI and meant for this Bench on admission of the application. But if it is observed that when an operational creditor does not suggest the name of any interim resolution professional and the interim resolution professional is appointed by the Adjudicating Authority from the panel of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India available for the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad, the dispute is arising for payment of interim resolution professional fees, paper publication costs, etc., in the first month of the corporate insolvency resolution process. This is more, when a financial creditor or othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
