9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UDICIAL) 1.This is an application is filed by Mr. Pardeep Kumar Lakhani, (hereinafter referred to is the "Applicant") who has been appointed as an IRP in the matter of M's My Kind Vacations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s Dion Global Solutions Limited vide order dated 18.08.2020 of this bench. The present application is filed under Section 60(5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred as the "Code"), with the following prayers: a) Pass an order to declare the transaction of payment on 19.08.2020 made by Corporate Debtor to Respondent No.1 as non-est in law and direct Respondent No.1 to pay to the Corporate Debtor a sum of Rs. 1,26,522/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Six Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Two Only) in the Bank Accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an application bearing no. CP (IB) NO.2695/ND/2019 under Section 9 was lile. by M/s Mykind Vacations Pvt. Ltd., (the operational creditor) against M/s Dion Global Solutions Limited (the corporate Debtor), the same was iadmitted vide order dated 18.08.2020 wherein Mr. Pradeep Lakhani, having Regd. No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00541/2017-18/10966 was appointed as an IRP. 3. The applicant states that he took over the affairs of the corporate debtor in terms of Section 17 of the IB Code and CIRP Regulations on 27.08.2020. In the 1s COC meeting the applicant was confirmed as the RP of the corporate debtor. 4. The applicant states that upon perusal of Bank Account bearing No. 00030340025085 in HDFC Bank, Sector 125 Noida Branch of the corporate D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice reports and email has been annexed. The Respondent No. 1 has contested the application and filed reply. However, none appeared on behalf of Respondent No. 2 to 5 inspite of being served. Hence Respondents Nos. 2 to 5 were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 08.01.2021. 7. The Respondent No.1 filed reply and stated the following : a) The respondent states that a sum of Rs. 1,26,522 and Rs. 39,360 was; received on 19.08.2020 and 13.10.2020 respectively through NEFT. Out of which an amount of Rs. 8,522/- and Rs. 2,672/- respectively was deducted as TDS. However same has not been deposited by the corporate debtor in its Income Tax account till date. b) Further stated that the applicant has prayed for reversal of only Rs. 1,26,522 and n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their claim before the IRP/RP which be considered in the accordance with provisions of the code. Arguments cf Respondent No.1 that the said payment be allowed, merely on ground that the services were used by the corporate debtor in past as well as continues does not hold water in eyes of law as per the provisions of IBC clearly bars the same. Hence, this bench directs the respondent No. 1 to 5 herein to refund all payments received by them on 19.08.2020 and 20.08.2020 respectively: a) Respondent No.1 to refund an amount of Rs. 1,26,522/- in the account of corporate debtor under the control of the applicant/RP. b) Respondent No.2 to refund an amount of Rs. 89,694/- in the account of corporate debtor under the control of the applicant/ R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
