TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich was executed between the Petitioner and the Respondent. Hence, the Company Petition being filed on 19.02.2019, is well within the limitation. Thus, Company Petition satisfies all legal requirements for admission. Since the Corporate Debtor did not file any reply, the claim of Operational Creditor remained unchallenged. Hence, this Bench feels that the Petitioner has successfully demonstrated the existence of debt and default committed by the Corporate Debtor in this case - Petition allowed. - C.P. No. 749/IBC/MB/2019 - - - Dated:- 17-10-2022 - Hon ble H. V. Subba Rao , Member ( Judicial ) And Hon ble Anuradha Sanjay Bhatia , Member ( Technical ) For the Applicant: Mr. Dipesh U. Siroya ( Advocate ) For the Responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnum on outstanding amount, due as per the Invoices. 4. The Petitioner submits that, it had maintained a Running Account in respect of goods supplied to the Respondent, and when a payment was made, a credit entry was made in the running account. The Petitioner further submits that in the year 2015, the Respondent issued 7 cheques towards discharge of its liability, which were returned as dishonoured on account of Funds insufficient . The particulars of the said cheques are as follows: Cheque No. Date Amount 674184 20.10.2015 2,25,000 674185 20.10.2015 2,50,807 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd over to him all the original documents. 6. The Petitioner annexed the Financial Statements of Corporate Debtor for the years 2016 and 2018 in which name of the Petitioner is being mentioned for the to the extent of sum of Rs.11,58,488/-. The Petitioner further annexed the Statement of running account, with Statement of interest calculation, of the Corporate Debtor, for the period from February 2013 to 30.06.2015. 7. The Petitioner thereby issued Demand Notice under Form 3 and 4, dated 31.12.2018, for the default amount of Rs.29,12,463/-, to which the Respondent has not filed any reply. 8. The Petitioner further submits that the Debt fell due on 20.10.2015 upon issuance of cheques from Operational Debtor. However, A fresh limitat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basing on which the above Company Petition was filed. He has also invited the attention of this Bench to the Demand Notice dated 31.12.2018, and the proof of delivery of demand notice on the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor having received the Demand Notice, did not send any reply nor paid the amount to Operational Creditor. 11. Upon perusal of the Company Petition, this Bench expressed its view with regard to the bar of limitation, for filing the Petition. However, the Petitioner satisfied this Bench with a view that, a fresh computation of limitation period should begin from 15.09.2017, as the date of MOU which was executed between the Petitioner and the Respondent. Hence, the above Company Petition being filed on 19.02.2019, is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interim resolution professional to carry out the functions as mentioned under the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016. C. The Operational Creditor shall deposit an amount of Rs. (2) Lakhs towards the initial CIRP costs by way of a Demand Draft drawn in favour of the Interim Resolution Professional appointed herein, immediately upon communication of this Order. The IRP shall spend the above amount only towards expenses and not towards his fee till his fee is decided by COC. D. That this Bench hereby prohibits the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
