TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 2045
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("the Code") for the alleged default in settling the dues to an extent of Rs. 18,74,173.22 for the services rendered by the Applicant. The transaction leading to this application is as follows: i. The Applicant is engaged in the business of freight forwarding and rendered services to the Respondent for about 2 years. The Respondent had become irregular in clearing the dues of the Applicant company from November, 2016. The Applicant company has submitted that the Respondent vide email dated 19.04.2017 had duly admitted the amount due to the Applicant as Rs. wherein they had sent their ledger account. As the Respondent failed to clear the principal amount along with interest a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d from the website of the courier company, www.tpcindia.com, is on record. iii. The Applicant contends that the conduct of the Respondent clearly exhibits their malafide conduct. He also contends that he has never received any notice invoking the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 including under Section 62 of the said Act till the demand notices were sent to the respondent company on 06.09.2017. He also says that none of the emails exchanged between the parties prior to 06.09.2017 even remotely mentions anything about the notice under Section 62 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 and therefore the allegations set out in their letter dated 01.09.2017 are false and baseless. The Applicant further conten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d after admitting, the Respondent is trying to take shelter by raising a frivolous dispute only to avoid the due process of law. ii. The Applicant has duly discharged its duty as per the agreement by delivering the consignment to the consignor as asked by the Respondent. The Applicant had got every document approved by the Respondent before the consignment was processed. Since the bills were approved by the officials of the Respondent before filing with the authorities the question of negligence does not arise. iii. It is further contended that the Applicant is not responsible for filing any document with any authority other than for delivering the consignment to its destination. The agreement does not mention that the App....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Respondent is frivolous and a means of escaping liability under the Code. 5. The Applicant has also exposed how the Respondent has back dated the notice for conciliation of disputes and tried to escape from the provisions of the Code as is seen from the tracking reports submitted by the Applicant company. The respondent has not come to this Tribunal with clean hands and this attitude is highly condemnable. if the Respondent had good intentions it would have settled the amounts due to the Applicant minus the disputed amount, instead it has adopted devious ways which is not acceptable. Hence the arguments put forth by the Respondent are rejected and this Tribunal orders initiation of the CIRP. 6. The Applicant has proposed name of Sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....during the pendency of the moratorium period in tenns of Section 14(2) and 14(3) as extracted hereunder: 2) The supply of essential goods or services to the corporate debtor as may be specified shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during moratorium period. 3) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator. 8. The duration of the period of moratorium shall be as provided in Section 14(4) of IBC, 2016 and for ready reference reproduced as follows: 4) The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of such order till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution pr....