9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt company, claimed to be the corporate debtor. 2. The applicant, Alig International is a proprietorship firm, has filed the present application claiming as the operational creditor with the prayer for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the provisions of the Code. 3. The details of transactions leading to the filing of this petition as averred by the petitioner are as follows: a. The Operational creditor is a proprietorship firm, operating since 1990 in the field of furnished leather, leather goods, saddlery and fancy shoe uppers. b. The Operational Creditor submitted that the Corporate Debtor bad failed to make the payment for the invoice dated 30.10.2013, amounting to Rs. 12,34,051/- for the good supplied by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted the following (a) That the present petition has been filed by the sole proprietorship firm is not maintainable. Further stated that no authority letter of Dr. S. Ahsan, being the proprietor of the firm has been placed on record. (b) That the amount claimed by the applicant is time barred and accordingly no amount is due and payable. It is added that only one invoice was raised by the applicant to the corporate debtor on 30.10.2013, which was due and payable, as the period of limitation lapsed on completion of 3 years i.e. 30.10.2016 from the date of invoice. Further it is also submitted that as per ledger account, the last payment was made on 10.02.2014 which is also barred by limitation. (c) That the application has not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er 24.3.3020 even if the debt is of date earlier than 24.03.2020. Since the present application under section 9 of the code had been revived on 31.03.2022, therefore the threshold limit of Rs. 1 Crore of debt will be applicable in the given facts. In this regard, the reference can be made to the Judgment of Hon'ble NCLAT in the matter of Jumbo Paper Products V. Hansraj Agrofresh Pvt. Ltd. (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 813 of 2021) wherein it was held that the any statute/law can be applied retrospectively only if explicit provision regarding its retrospective application is made in the statute. It is seen that notification of MCA dated 24.3.2020 makes it unambiguously clear that the threshold limit to be considered for section 9 appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
