AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 620
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(CIRP in short) in respect of the Corporate Debtor Company, namely, Amrit Cement Ltd. 2. The Petitioner / Operational Creditor i.e. A. K. C. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. is having its Registered Office at KP 2/134 Chaliyam, District Calicut, Kerala - 673301. 3. The Respondent / Corporate Debtor, namely Amrit Cement Ltd. was incorporated on 24.01.2008 with CIN No.U26940ML2008PLC008302 and is having its Registered Office at Opposite Horse Shoe Building, Lower Lachumiere, Shillong, Meghalaya 793 001. The authorised capital of the Corporate Debtor as on the date of filing the petition is Rs. 15,00,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Crores only) and the paid up capital is Rs. 13,79,45,640/-.(Rupees Thirteen Crores Seventy Nine lacs Forty Five thousand S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 48,54,716/- Forty Eight lacs Fifty Four thousand Seven hundred Sixteen only) exclusive of interest as accrued thereupon. Copies of the said invoices are attached with the petition collectively marked as Annexure- D. 8. It is submitted that a summary sheet detailing the information of all the 81 invoices are also attached with the application marked as Annexure E, from which it is evident that the Corporate Debtor was liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,95,28,552/- (Rupees One Crore Ninety Five lacs Twenty Eight thousand Five hundred Fifty Two only) against the aforesaid invoices. The same is also evident from the Ledger Statement and the Certificate issued by the Auditor of the Operational Creditor. 9. It is further submitted that the am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... replied to the Operational Creditor on 04.04.2018 stating that "it is vehemently denied and disputed that there is an unpaid amount of Rs. 1,98,95,546.00 (Rupees One Crore Ninety Eight lacs Ninety Five thousand Five hundred Forty Six only) as reflected in the 78 number of invoices attached with the impugned notice as dealt with herein. All the alleged bills as raised by you started from 2nd of November, 2010 and ending of 10th of December, 2012 and the payments as received by you were lastly as on 11th of February, 2013 and so the alleged bills as raised by you were strictly barred by the laws of limitation and thus you are not entitled to any payment as allegedly claimed by you. ... Under the aforementioned fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... work order i.e. after three months of the last payment due on 30.06.2011. 15.5 Last payment was received by the Operational Creditor on 11.02.2013 and three years is ending on 11.02.2016 15.6 Application under Section 9 of IBC has been filed by the Operational Creditor on 29.06.2018 based on the invoices raised between 02.11.2010 to 10.12.2012. 16. The case was taken up by this Adjudicating Authority on 24.07.2018, 27.08.2018, 17.09.2018, 16.11.2018, 02.01.2019, 21.01.2019, 12.02.2019, 22.02.2019, 01.03.2019, 02.05.2019, 22.08.2019, 02.09.2019, 20.11.2019, 02.12.2019, 16.12.2019, 22.01.2020, 06.02.2020, 27.02.2020, 11.11.2020, and 09.12.2020. 17. During the arguments, the Learned Counsel for the Operational Creditor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., corporate death. This being the case, the expression "debt due" in the definition Sections of the Code would obviously only refer to debts that are "due and payable" in law, i.e., the debts that are not time-barred. That this is the case has already been held by us in the Innoventive Industries. (supra) ..... *** *** *** 36. The definition of "default" in Section 3(12) uses the expression "due and payable" followed by the expression "and is not paid by the debtor or the corporate debtor....". "Due and payable" in Section 3(12), therefore, only refers to the whole or part of a debt which when referring to the date on which it becomes "due and payable", is not in fact paid by the corporate debtor. The context of this provi....