TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C to recover the money forcefully as IBC immediately changes the management of the Company. It is also very much clear that they have not filed the Postal Receipt before this Tribunal which proves the fact that there is some mismatch between Consignment Number given in the Track Report and Postal Receipt. Hence, the finding of Adjudicating Authority is correct. It is also proved from the email that the Appellant has accepted the fact that the material is defective and substandard and failed to lift the complete material. In the present case the delivery of demand notice itself is a grey area and Adjudicating Authority has rightly held so. In addition to that there is also a pre-existing dispute - Furthermore, this is the case of chasi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 8 of IBC and there are other grounds also for dismissal of the Application. 2. The brief profile of the case is as under: The Appellant is engaged in the business of manufacturing of various plastic products like HDPE, PVC pipes, ducts, tubes, etc. and they are supplying it to the customers across the country. The Respondent issued Purchase Order dated 9th March, 2018 to the Appellant for purchase of goods and also made an advance payment on 29th March, 2018 of an amount of ₹ 9,65,554/- pursuant to which the Appellant supplied goods to the Respondent. The Appellant supplied total value of goods worth ₹ 91,57,699/- to the Corporate Debtor. However, upon delivery of the entire goods, the Respondent wrote an ema ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... balance payment. Hence, they have no other alternative but to approach the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the petition in an arbitrary manner by holding that a dispute exists between the parties before issuance of demand notice dated 27th June, 2019 regarding quality of the goods supplied by the Appellant as Operational Creditor to the Respondent as Corporate Debtor. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that the Purchase Order dated 9th March, 2018 for supply of Pipes has clearly mentioned the description of the Pipes in the said purchase order. The Purchase Order contains binding terms and conditions accepted by both the parties and hence binding on both the parties in accordance wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lift the complete material being defective and has failed to lift the material which is of no use to the Corporate Debtor. However, the Appellant is pressurizing using the provisions of IBC to recover the money forcefully as IBC immediately changes the management of the Company. 7. It is also very much clear that they have not filed the Postal Receipt before this Tribunal which proves the fact that there is some mismatch between Consignment Number given in the Track Report and Postal Receipt. Hence, the finding of Adjudicating Authority is correct. It is also proved from the email that the Appellant has accepted the fact that the material is defective and substandard and failed to lift the complete material. 8. The requisite conditio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
