TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 966
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Rules thereon. 2. The brief averments made in the petition are as follows: a) It is averred that the Corporate Debtor is in to the business of manufacturing rubber products. The Operational creditor supplied raw material "Butyl Reclaimed Rubber" to the Corporate Debtor. b) It is averred that the Operational Creditor has raised invoices on continuous basis and been receiving the payments against the Running Account bills. From 06.09.2014 to 25.09.2015 the Operational Creditor has raised various invoices to the tune of Rs. 5,73,15,250/- against the material supplied to the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor failed to pay the invoices amount and committed default. c) It is averred that the Corporate Debtor issued cheques for the outstanding amount against the invoices raised and the said cheques were dishonored with an endrossement "Insufficient Funds". The Operational Creditor filed Compliant under Section 138 of NI Act. d) It is averred that the Corporate Debtor taken delivery of the goods and issued C Forms. This itself proves that there is no dispute with regard to delivery of goods. 3. The brief averments made in the counter are as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tional Creditor has been continuously supplying the material to Corporate Debtor, raising invoices on continuous basis and has been receiving the payment against Running Account Bills. 7. The case of Operational Creditor is that it supplied rubber between 06.09.2014 to 25.09.2015 and raised invoices of Rs. 5,73,15,250/- and interest accrued thereon is Rs. 1,44,49,846/-. The working sheet is attached as Annexure-2 to the petition. Invoices raised are shown as Annexure-3 to the petition. 8. It is the case of Corporate Debtor that it issued reply raising dispute to the notice issued under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. It is the case of Corporate Debtor is has suffered damage due to supply of inferior quality of rubber and that it had filed Civil Suit in City Civil Court, Hyderabad for recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,66,06,716/- in O.S.S.R. No. 4657/2017.It is shown at pages 86-98 of paper book filed by the Corporate Debtor. It is also the case of Corporate Debtor that notice of dispute was raised vide reply dated 05.04.2016 which was also reiterated in the reply on 14.06.2017 appearing at Page No. 83 of the Counter. Thus, according to the Corporate Debtor there is a pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Notice dated 03.06.2017 for which the Corporate Debtor issued reply raising the same dispute. Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly held in the decision of Mobilox Innovations (P.) Ltd. v. Kirusa Software (P.) Ltd. at Paragraph No. 40 of the judgment held as follows: "It is clear, therefore, that once the operational creditor has filed an application, which is otherwise complete, the adjudicating authority must reject the application under Section 9(5)(2)(d) if notice of dispute has been received by the operational creditor or there is a record of dispute in the information utility. It is clear that such notice must bring to the notice of the operational creditor the "existence" of a dispute or the fact that a suit or arbitration proceeding relating to a dispute is pending between the parties. Therefore, all that the adjudicating authority is to see at this stage is whether there is a plausible contention which requires further investigation and that the "dispute" is not a patently feeble legal argument or an assertion of fact unsupported by evidence. It is important to separate the grain from the chaff and to reject a spurious defence which is mere bluster. However, in doing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the period 1st July, 2019 to 31st December, 2019 in compliance with Section 16(3)(a) of the Code in order to avoid delay. Accordingly, this tribunal appoint Mr. Nukala Sreedhar, IP Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00432/2017-2018/10755, E-mail Id: sreenuka [email protected], Mobile No:9848146369 as an Interim Resolution Professional. The aforesaid interim resolution professional has no disciplinary proceedings pending against him. He shall file his written communication and all relevant paper immediately before Registrar of this Tribunal but not later than three days from the date of this order. 16. Hence, the Adjudicating Authority admits this Petition under Section 9 of IBC, 2016, declaring moratorium for the purposes referred to in Section 14 of the Code, with following directions:- a) The 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; Transferring , encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the Corporate Debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest ....