TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed at. Since this matter is ex-parte, there are no complete facts before this Adjudicating Authority. On perusal of documents, it is clear that various meetings between both parties were held, to arrive at amicable settlement. Since the respondent has not filed reply, the responsibility of the applicant to prove 'debt' and 'default' is very high. The onus is on the Applicant to satisfy that there is no pre-existing dispute between the both. From the documents, it is clear that there were lot of discussions and meetings between both. The outcome of the same is not before this Adjudicating Authority. Since the IBC is rigorous statue, abundant caution ought to be exercised, before passing order. Application dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s due and payable with the last admission and promise to pay being recorded in the minutes of the meeting dated 15.12.2018 between the Directors and the Petitioner for finding amicable solution as follows: i) Clarity on infused funds checked with bank statement with dates to the tune of 1.718 crore found ok and accepted by both the parties; ii) Validation done on 15 out of 18 transactions for the money received Company to Ami's bank account to the tune of 9,24,856. Another 3 transactions plus any missed to be checked for 1,40,000/- plus any other amount; iii) 60 lakhs receipt verified from third party. Outside lender to be paid an interest of 18% at this point. Money was received on November 08, 2016; iv) Kriyatech ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The learned counsel for the Operational Creditor submitted that the debt fell due on 01.04.2017. On 16.09.2019, the Operational Creditor sent demand notice under Section 8, in Form-3 demanding payment in respect of unpaid operational debt of ₹ 10,50,000/- due from the Corporate Debtor within 10 days from the receipt of notice. The receipt of the said notice was duly acknowledged by the Corporate Debtor on 17.09.2019. The Corporate Debtor had neither replied nor effected payment to the Operational Creditor till date. 4. This application has been filed on 17.10.2019. The pecuniary jurisdiction of this Adjudicating Authority, at the time of filing this application was debt due Rupees one lakh and above. Hence, this Adjudicatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicating authority is to see at this stage is whether there 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 Court does not need to be satisfied that the defence is likely to succeed. The Court does not at this stage examine the merits of the dispute except to the extent indicated above. So long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudicating authority has to reject the application. 6. On perusal of documents, it is clear that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
