TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 961X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etter by signing the Retailership Agreement post receipt of security deposit. Further, Clause 3 of letter dated 24.09.2016 stipulates that the security deposit shall be refunded at the end of 7th year. Since the Respondent has neither entered into an agreement nor refunded the deposit, there is a clear default. This application was filed on 05.12.2019 and as submitted by Petitioner the date of default is 05.08.2019. Hence, the application falls within the limitation period of three years - the Respondent has defaulted in the payment of the outstanding debt. The application made by the Petitioner is complete in all respects as required by law. It clearly shows that the Respondent is in default of a debt due and payable, and the default ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had taken a refundable security deposit of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakh Only) for providing Dealership of Retail Outlet at land situated at NH-14 Village Bagawas, Sojat Dist-Pali, Rajasthan. The Petitioner paid to the Respondent fully refundable security deposit of Rs. 15,00,000/- vide Demand Draft No. 751011 on SBBJ dated 23.09.2016 for obtaining dealership of the Company. The same was received and acknowledged by the Corporate Debtor vide receipt no. 162. The receipt is placed as Exhibit-C at page 20. 4. The Petitioner submits that, the Respondent had confirmed that the outlet will be operational within 90 days from 24.09.2016 i.e. date of issuance of letter of intent. Further, it is the contention of the Petitioner that the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ublication none appeared for the Respondent. In view of the above circumstances, the Respondent was set ex-parte vide Order dated 10.05.2022. Thereafter, when the matter was listed for hearing on 03.08.2022 the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent sought time to take out an Interlocutory Application for setting aside the ex-parte Order. 10. On 05.09.2022 when the matter was listed, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent sought further time to get the Interlocutory Application for setting aside the ex-parte Order listed, which was admittedly not on board. In the above circumstances, we hold that these are nothing but tactics to delay the time bound proceedings under the Code. 11. In the above backdrop, we are proceeding with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there was a valid disbursal. 14. The Respondent was under an obligation to enter into an Appointment Letter by signing the Retailership Agreement post receipt of security deposit. Further, Clause 3 of letter dated 24.09.2016 stipulates that the security deposit shall be refunded at the end of 7th year. We hold that since the Respondent has neither entered into an agreement nor refunded the deposit, there is a clear default. 15. This application was filed on 05.12.2019 and as submitted by Petitioner the date of default is 05.08.2019. Hence, the application falls within the limitation period of three years. 16. In the backdrop of above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the Respondent has defaulted in the payment of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Corporate Debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002; iv. The recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in possession of the Corporate Debtor. 20. Notwithstanding the above, during the period of moratorium: - i. The supply of essential goods or services to the corporate debtor, if continuing, shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during the moratorium period; ii. That the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 14 of the IBC shall not apply to such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any sectora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch coercive steps will follow. 25. The Operational Creditor shall deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh only) with the IRP to meet the expenses arising out of issuing public notice and inviting claims. These expenses are subject to approval by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). 26. The Registry is directed to communicate this Order to the Operational Creditor, the Corporate Debtor and the IRP by Speed Post and email immediately, and in any case, not later than two days from the date of this Order. 27. A copy of this Order be sent to the Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, Mumbai, for updating the Master Data of the Corporate Debtor. The said Registrar of Companies shall send a compliance report in this regard to the Reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
