Tribunal admits petition against Silveroak for payment default, declares moratorium.

The Tribunal admitted Ultratech Cement Limited's petition against Silveroak Commercials Limited for defaulting on a payment of Rs. 37,91,750, inclusive of interest. The Corporate Debtor's dishonored cheques and lack of response to the demand notice resulted in the Tribunal finding them liable. Consequently, the Tribunal declared a moratorium, appointing an interim resolution professional and specifying the moratorium's effective period until the insolvency resolution process or liquidation is completed.

---

---

Issues:
1. Petition filed by Ultratech Cement Limited seeking Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Silveroak Commercials Limited for default in payment.
2. Allegation of default in payment amounting to Rs. 37,91,750 inclusive of interest.
3. Dishonored cheques issued by Corporate Debtor.
4. Demand notice issued by Petitioner and no response from Corporate Debtor.
5. Lack of representation from Corporate Debtor despite publication of petition.
6. Tribunal's decision on the liability of the Corporate Debtor.
7. Admission of the petition and declaration of moratorium with specific directions.

Analysis:
1. The petition was filed by Ultratech Cement Limited to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Silveroak Commercials Limited due to an alleged default in payment. The Petitioner claimed that the Corporate Debtor failed to make a payment of Rs. 37,91,750, including interest, invoking the provisions of Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

2. Ultratech Cement Limited supplied cement and ready mix concrete material to the Corporate Debtor and raised invoices amounting to Rs. 30,78,125. The Petitioner was entitled to charge interest at 21% per annum on the delayed payment, totaling Rs. 7,13,625 till a specified date.

3. The Corporate Debtor issued two cheques, one for Rs. 15,54,600 and another for Rs. 15,34,900, both of which were dishonored due to insufficient funds. This non-payment led to the demand notice issued by the Petitioner on 18.05.2018, demanding the total outstanding amount.

4. Despite the service of the demand notice, the Corporate Debtor did not respond, prompting the Petitioner to file an affidavit stating that the Corporate Debtor did not raise any dispute regarding the unpaid debt, as per Section 9(3)(b) of the Code.

5. The Corporate Debtor did not respond to the petition, with the copy sent being returned as "addressee left." The Petitioner published the petition in two newspapers and filed proof of service, yet there was no representation from the Corporate Debtor.

6. After reviewing the petition and accompanying documents, the Tribunal concluded that the Corporate Debtor was indeed liable to pay the claimed amount and had defaulted in making the payment, leading to the decision in favor of the Petitioner.

7. The Tribunal admitted the petition and declared a moratorium, prohibiting various actions against the Corporate Debtor, appointing an interim resolution professional, and specifying the effective period of the moratorium until the completion of the insolvency resolution process or liquidation, as per the provided directions.

---