TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 635
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The Petitioner/the Operational Creditor is involved in the business of engineering of bulk material handling and has expertise in developing new innovative products and technology while the Corporate Debtor is a trader of steel fabrication service for industrial sheds, dismantling, structuring was entrusted with the work of "Songadh Temple". The Operational Creditor supplied fabricated steel cage for installation and lifting of the statue of Lord shri Bahubali Swami at the site Songadh Bhavnagar by the Corporate Debtor as per the Offer Letter annexed with the application Exhibit F. 3. It is stated that the Operational Creditor raised various invoices from March 24, 2018 to May 17, 2018, amounting to Rs. 43,41,740/- (Rupees Forty-Three lakhs Forty-One Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Only) out of which the Corporate Debtor had failed to make the payment of Rs. 11,41,740/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Forty-One Thousand Seven Hundred Forty only). The Operational Creditor has annexed with the Petition, copy of the invoices issued by the Operational Creditor on the Corporate Debtor and marked as Exhibit B. 4. It is contended by the ld. Lawyers of the Operational Creditor that Corporate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Corporate Debtor that religious ceremony of the Temple was to be performed on 18.04.2018 and before that the Operational Creditor/Petitioner was required to complete the work by providing necessary steel fabricated cage which can lift the idol of 250-ton of "Lord Sri Bahubali Swami". 9. It is stated that there was no written agreement, however, Operational Creditor petitioner agreed to carry out the work at a cost of Rs. 32.00 lakh including taxes. The price was much higher but since the Corporate Debtor was in need of quality work, the Corporate Debtor agreed. It was further agreed by the Operational Creditor/Petitioner specifically that Operational Creditor/Petitioner will use only Tata Steel. 10. It is submitted by the Corporate Debtor that he had occasioned to visit the factory of Operational Creditor to see the progress of work and for making advance payment, but found that the work was not up to the mark to lift such heavy idol of Lord Sri Bahabali Swami and warned the Operational Creditor/Petitioner of the consequences but the Operational Creditor assured the Corporate Debtor that there would not be any problem while executing the work. 11. It is stated by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 9(3)(b) of the Code stating that no dispute is raised by the Corporate Debtor to Demand Notice under Section 8 of the Code. The Corporate Debtor states that Corporate Debtor has raised genuine objections vide his reply, dated 06.10.2018, to the Demand Notice sent by the Operational Creditor bringing all the facts leading to the failure to the Operational Creditor/Petitioner, in lifting of the fabricated steel cage and consequential installation of the idol. 16. The Corporate Debtor has also annexed with the Petition, copy of the newspaper article reporting the incident that took place at the site of Songadh Temple, while installing the idol of "Lord Sri Bahubali Swami". It is stated by the Corporate Debtor that ceremony of installing the idol was postponed because of faulty welding work which was done by the Operational Creditor and also to avoid unwanted mishap. 17. It is also submitted by the Corporate Debtor that there is also dispute about the quality of steel used by the Operational Creditor. The Operational Creditor, instead of using Tata Steel, as agreed, has used other Steel which was not up to the mark consequent upon which, at the time of lifting the statue to a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed fake and frivolous Demand Notice, dated 26.09.2018. On receipt of notice, the Corporate Debtor/the respondent raised dispute by filing reply within 10 days of the receipt of the Demand Notice raising the dispute and has narrated all the facts. 22. It is also a matter of record that the invoices do not contain any interest clause in the event of any late payment, even the ledger produced by the Operational Creditor does not indicate that the interest is booked in the books of account of the Operational Creditor. 23. On perusal of the undated reply of the Operational Creditor, Annexure L on Page 58 of the Petition, it is found that there is/are serious dispute(s) with regard to the quality of work. 24. The dispute has also been raised by the Corporate Debtor vide its notice of dispute, dated 06.10.2018, made against the demand notice, dated 26.09.2018 i.e. within 10 days from the receipt of demand notice. The said fact is admitted by the Operational Creditor by way of affidavit in Para 7 on Page 78 of the Petition. 25. Thus, it is well established that there is pre-existing dispute. There is no defined agreement entered into between the parties. That apart, the Corpora....