TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 945X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orporate Debtor as per his books of accounts annexed as Annexure No. 4 at Page 16 to the Company Petition covering from the period 29.07.2015 to 31.03.2016 - As per section 34 of the Evidence Act, mere entries in the books of accounts is not enough to charge the other persons with liability. It is well settled proposition of law that the Operational Creditor or a plaintiff is not entitled for automatic order of admission simply because the defendant did not file any reply nor advance any arguments - this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the above Company Petition is barred by limitation and is liable to be rejected - Petition dismissed. - C. P. No. 658/IBC/MB/2019 - - - Dated:- 10-8-2021 - Hari Venkata Subba Rao, Member (J) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l banking rates. iii. The Operational Creditor has made supplied of Downlight Ecoline herein referred to as Goods to PBPL. PBPL has no point of time whatsoever raised any issues with respect to the quality and/or quantity of the aforesaid supplies. iv. Pursuant to the supplies made as requested and/or required by as per the Purchase Orders of supplied goods to the PBPL and raised Invoices (as more particularly set out in which were received, acknowledged and accepted by the latter without any demurrer whatsoever. Under each of the invoices, PBPL was liable to make payments. However, PBPL failed to make payment on the due dates and has since then, remained in default of the same. v. The above debt has arisen since for suppli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Corporate Debtor has put up appearance from time to time through their advocate and did not choose to file reply. On the other hand on 16.04.2021, Ms. Amita Chaware, counsel appearing for the respondent requested short time to take final call regarding settlement. However, no settlement has taken place in this matter. On 29.07.2021, when the matter was finally listed for arguments the counsel appearing for the Corporate Debtor purposefully remained absent from participating in the hearing. Therefore, this Tribunal was constrained to hear the argument of counsel appearing for the Operational Creditor and reserved the matter for order. 5. The above Company Petition is filed by the Operational Creditor praying for resolution of an unr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02.2019 is beyond 3 years from the date of alleged last payment and is barred by limitation even if the statement of account is presumed to be true and is accepted as a running account for argument's sake without admitting. Even otherwise all the invoices annexed by the Operational Creditor to the Company Petition relates to the period July 2015 to February 2016. The amount covered under last invoices dated 10.02.2016 and 01.02.2016 for an amount of 10,000/- and 2,344/- respectively which are less than the threshold limit of ₹ 1 lakh. All the invoices annexed from page No. 17 to 30 to the Company Petition are beyond 3 years. iv. It is well settled proposition of law that the Operational Creditor or a plaintiff is not entitled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
