AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 448
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....follows: (1) M/s. SSP Private limited (Petitioner/Operational Creditor) is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 was incorporated in the year 1985 bearing CIN: U29219HR1985PTC021129 with its registered office at No. 13, Milestone, Mathura Road, Faridabad - 121003. The Petitioner is a leading manufacturer, exporter, technology developer and turnkey projects & equipment supplier for Dairy Processing industry, Food & Fruit Processing Industry, Chemical Processing Industry, Herbal Extraction Plants, Gelatin Processing plants and also provider of technology for zero liquid discharge for Effluent Treatment for various Industries. (2) M/s. Athani Sugars Limited (Respondent/Corporate Debtor) was incorporated on 25-5-1995 bearing CIN:U40109KA1995PLC017806 under the Companies Act. Its Authorized Share Capital is Rs. 50,00,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Crores only) and the Paid-up Capital of Rs. 28,56,05,000/-(Rupees Twenty Eight Crore Fifty Six Lakhs and Five Thousand only). The Respondent/Corporate Debtor is in the business of production, collection and distribution of electricity. (3) It is stated that the Respondent/Corporate Debtor placed Work Order and P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt cannot continue to hold the release of payment and put submission of performance bank grantee as a pre-condition. The Respondent has raised any dispute or proceedings are pending either before the Arbitral Tribunal or before any judicial court with respect to the subject purchase order and any issues arising out of the said transaction. The claim is well within period of limitation. It is stated that there is no contractual obligation upon the Petitioner to continue to provide its maintenance and repair services. Hence, the present is filed by seeking to initiate CIRP against the Respondent. 3. The Respondent/Corporate Debtor has filed Statement of Objections dated 12-1-2020 and Additional Statement of Objections dated 27-1-2020 by inter-alia contending as follows: (1) Athani Sugars Limited (the Respondent) is incorporated on 25-5-1995. It is classified as Non-Government Company, and is registered at Registrar of Companies, Bangalore. It is involved in manufacturing Sugar, Ethanol, Bio-compost, co-generation of electricity etc. (2) It is stated that total amount, as per purchase Order dated 07-12-2013, and Agreement dated 10-12-2013 was for a sum of Rs. 6,50....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r failed to perform their obligations as per the Purchase order and the Agreement in question. The Respondent is not liable to pay any amount whatsoever to the Petitioner. In fact, the Petitioner is liable to pay the Respondent for the loss incurred by them due to non-performance of the contract by the Petitioner. 4. Heard Shri Vivek.S, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, and Mrs.S.B.Shoba, learned Counsel for the Respondent. We have carefully perused the pleadings of both the Parties, and the extant provisions of the Code, the Rules made thereunder, and the law on the issue. 5. Shri Vivek.S, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, while reiterating the various averments made in the pleadings, as briefly stated supra, has further submitted that the debt and default in question are deemed to be not in dispute, and the instant application is filed in accordance with law, and thus he has asserted that it is a fit case to initiate CIRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor appointing IRP, imposed moratorium etc., 6. Mrs. S.B Shobha, learned Counsel for the Respondent, on the other hand, while reiterating the various averments made in the replies, as briefly stated supra, has strongly....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....commission of plant in question, they have not placed appropriate evidence to establish it has performed its obligations as per Purchase Order and Agreement in question. On the other hand, the Respondent has placed emails dated 21st August, 2015 and 31st August, 2015, 21st October, 2015 etc. On failure of the Petitioner to perform its responsibilities, as per Purchase Order and Agreement in question, the Respondent was forced to place purchase order with Raj Process Equipment's Systems Pvt Ltd for supply of Pre-treatment system, for which the Petitioner failed to do, for total amount of Rs. 1,780,000, and thus obtained the requisite service. 9. As per terms and conditions mentioned in the Agreement in question, payment for all invoices shall be made within 7 days from the date of submission and acceptance of invoices by the Purchaser(Clause 2.9.5) clause 2.14 provide mechanism for Resolution of Dispute and the Respondent has right to terminate the services for defective service. Though cause of arose in the year 2014, the Petitioner failed to invoke alternative dispute resolution or file any case till Statutory Demand Notice dated 20-2-19 issued under the provisions Code. It....