TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D [ 2019 (11) TMI 1428 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI] , as well as the decision of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of JYOTI LTD. VERSUS BOVING FOURESS LTD. [ 2000 (12) TMI 817 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA] , where it was held that The application was pursued for realisation of the interest amount, which, according to us is against the principle of the I B Code, as it should be treated to be an application pursued by the Applicant with malicious intent (to realise only Interest) for any purpose other than for the Resolution of Insolvency, or Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor and which is barred in view of Section 65 of the I B Code. Before parting, it is constrained to observe that the Adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Authority) Rules, 2016, in which the following averments have been made in Part-IV: Particulars of Operational Debt 1. TOTAL AMOUNT OF DEBT, DETAILS OF TRANSACTIONS ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH DEBT FALLS DUE AND THE DATE FROM WHICH SUCH DEBT FALLS DUE Total amount of Debt Rs. 9,97,122 (Rupees Nine Lac, Ninety Seven Thousand, One Hundred and Twenty two only) Against the supply of material. The details of Transactions are as under Invoice No. dated amount 401 10/12/16 21,96,744 468 16/01/17 16,62,250 Total Amount 3858994 Less total receipts- 28,61,872 Balance Debit 9,97,122 Date from which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That, it is worth mentioning that the Corporate Debtor has from the very beginning of the proceedings have denied any amount in default and later when the pleadings had completed and when the sword of the insolvency and moratorium was hanging on their head and in these compelling circumstances and in a way to escape from any liability has paid a sum of Rs. 9,97,172/- paid in the year 2021. 5. Thus the fact borne out from the record is that the Respondent has categorically admitted having received the principal amount of Rs. 9,97,172/- from the Appellant. However, there is no reference of this payment by the Appellant to the Respondent in the impugned order. Be that as it may, the Respondent continued to pursue the application for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by 17th January, 2019 through NEFT(s). The said amounts were paid before the admission of the application under Section 9 of the I B Code. Even after receiving the total amount due, the Appellant pursued the application under Section 9 of the I B Code for a sum of Rs.2,16,155/- towards interest. In these background, the Adjudicating Authority observed that in the absence of any Agreement, no such amount can be claimed. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant relied on Invoices to suggest that in the Invoices , the claim was raised for payment of interest. However, we are not inclined to accept such submission as they were one side Invoices raised without any consent of the Corporate Debtor . 5. Admittedly, before the admissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the Appellant. There is no merit in the Appeal, the Appeal is dismissed. 8. He has also referred to a decision of Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in Jyothi Limited Vs. Boving Fouress Limited in Company Petition No. 48 of 1998 decided on 01.12.2000 pertaining to winding up of the company in which the Hon ble Karnataka High Court has observed in regard to the invoice that it is a unilateral document and interest cannot be claimed until and unless it is signed by the parties. 9. On the other hand, Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that the goods were supplied on the basis of two orders placed by the Appellant. The first order was placed on the basis of Invoice No. 401 dated 10/12/17 about which there is no disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
