TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 1411
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nkruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 (for brevity 'the Rules') by Mr. Akash Agarwal (for brevity 'Applicant'), proprietor of M/s. Tirupati Green Energies, a sole proprietorship firm, with a prayer to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/s. Steamax Envirocare Pvt. Ltd. (for brevity 'Respondent'). 2. The Applicant, namely Mr. Akash Agarwal, is the sole proprietor of M/s. Tirupati Green Energies, a sole proprietorship concern, having Udyog Aadhar Number HR19B0002494, having its office at House No. 139/2, Anaj Mandi Road, Near Guru Govind Singh Complex, Ponta Sahib, Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh-173025. 3. The Respondent, namely M/s. Steamax Envirocare Private Li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to the respondent asking, them to make the entire payment of Rs. 25,85,612/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Six Hundred Twelve), along with interest @ 18% per annum, within 10 days from receipt of the notice, failing which the applicant shall initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution process against the Respondent. 6. The applicant has annexed postal receipt, along with the tracking report, showing the delivery of the said demand notice at the registered office of the Corporate Debtor. 7. After the delivery of demand notice sent under Section 8 of the Code, the Respondent filed its reply to the said notice, however, it has not raised any notice of dispute, but has a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 30.11.2017. The Respondent states that, the regular increase in the price of the raw material by the Operational Creditor was not only suo motu, but arbitrary as well. It is pertinent to mention herein that, due to the fact that the Respondent Company was under a contractual obligation for ensuring an un-interrupted steam supply with its client companies, the Respondent had no other option but to accept the discriminatory prices as billed by the Operational Creditor from time to time. 11. The Respondent further states that, besides steep rise in the prices of the material, there was constant degradation in the quality of the raw material/fuel supplied by the Operational Creditor, wherein the moisture content in the raw material/fuel su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the contract the material price was Rs. 2,650/- per ton which was increased by the Operational Creditor suo motu. In this regard, it is stated by the Applicant that the Corporate Debtor kept continuing and doing the business with the Operational Creditor till 17.04.2018, which is clearly reflective of the fact that the Corporate Debtor agreed with the increased rates of materials being very much in consonance with the prevailing market conditions and agreed thereby at that point of time, without any grievance in regard to the said increase, or even without any communication to that effect throughout the said business dealings. If the Corporate Debtor had any such objections to the said increase in the prices of materials, the same should....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1154", Hon'ble Supreme Court held: "40................... 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 defense which is mere bluster. However, in doing so, the Court, does not need to be satisfied that the defense is likely to succeed. The Court does not at this stage examine the merits of the dispute except to the extent indicated above. So long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudic....