2019 (7) TMI 1555

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....judicating Authority) Rule, 2016 (for brevity 'the Rules') with a prayer for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process in respect of Respondent Corporate Debtor.  2. The Respondent Company, against whom initiation of Corporate Insolvency resolution process has been sought for, has its registered office at House No. 63, Ground Floor, New Manglapuri, New Delhi, South West Delhi, New Delhi-110030. Since the registered office of the respondent company is in Delhi, this Tribunal is having territorial jurisdiction over the matter. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Operational Creditor is a company incorporated and registered under the laws prevalent in Germany, having its registered office at Gutenbergstr 1-3,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....14 13113.53 366413 27.10.14 26.12.14 298 368794 19.12.14 17.02.15 190 370672 19.02.15 20.04.15 43599 370673 19.02.15 20.04.15 11140.20 371018 27.02.15 28.04.15 54.40 374355 22.05.15 21.07.15 6478 374355 22.05.15 21.07.15 5154.80 377423 07.08.15 06.10.15 14249.20 377428 07.08.15 06.10.15 859.70 381198 10.11.15 09.01.16 1960 381236 11.11.15 10.01.16 30777 385712 15.03.16 14.05.16 38922.80 386426 06.04.16 05.06.16 3298.85 387071 19.04.16 18.06.16 1305 387865 09.05.16 08.07.16 768.96 388543 25.05.16 24.07.16 595 389909 28.06.16 27.08.16 915....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es. 10.Learned counsel for the Corporate Debtor has opposed the admission of the application and has advanced the following arguments:- i. Disputes regarding amount Claimed to be in Default • The Corporate debtor has submitted that the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor incorporated SEITZ India in order to expand the business of the Operational Creditor in India. It was agreed between the parties that the Corporate Debtor will transfer its business to SEITZ India for a consideration of Rs. 6 Crores. The disputes arose between the parties as the business of SEITZ India could not be successfully implemented. The parties concerned with the disputes are Seitz GmBH, Mr. Alexander Seitz, Seitz Cleaning Solution....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7 g. Email dated 04.01.2018 h. Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.04.2017 i. Memorandum of Understanding dated 20.07.2017 iii. Pending Litigation filed by both parties • There existed disputes prior to issuance of Demand Notice and filing of present petition. In the facts of this case, it cannot be said that the parties concerned are not related to each other commercially and the disputes of the Corporate Debtor is with third parties. Further, the Corporate Debtor has also filed a Civil Suit on 09.03.2018 bearing no. 679 of 2018 before Gurgaon District Court against the Operational Creditor and other parties related to Operational Creditor. A criminal complaint has also been lodged with the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... a pending dispute existing between the parties. Also the Corporate Debtor has filed a Civil Suit before bearing no. 679 of 2018 before Gurgaon District Court against the Operational Creditor and other parties related to Operational Creditor before the filing of this application but after the filing of Demand Notice. 13. It is pertinent to state here that this is not the forum to examine and adjudicate as to which portion of the claims are admissible. Tribunal will also not examine the merits of dispute. It is beyond the scope of this forum to decide as to which party and to what extent is responsible to pay amounts when there is a serious allegation of fabrication and misrepresentation. There is material to believe that disputes certain....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me is evident from the correspondence by many of emails exchanged between the parties from 10.04.2015 to 04.01.2018. Although emails mostly show discussion regarding the amount payable and dispute regarding management, the emails dated 27.04.2017 and 04.11.2018 clearly shows that there is a pre-existing dispute between the parties. Thus, it appears that there is an existence of prior dispute though civil suit and police complaints have been filed after the receiving of the demand notice. 17. It is also seen that both the Operational creditor and Corporate Debtor are closely linked not only in relation to these 2 companies but also several other entities as well. The director of the operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor have serve....