TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1978
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Petitioner are that he has claimed an arrears of salary dues since the year 1999 for rendering services to the Corporate Debtor for about 37 years as stated in the letter dated 31.03.2014, placed at page 97 of the typed set field with the Petition. It has been stated that whenever the Petitioner/ Operational Creditor demanded arrears of salary and wanted to be relieved, the Managing Director persuaded him to continue and assured that all his arrears of salary would be settled and for the reasons that the Petitioner remained associated with the Company for a very long time, the same was accommodated by the Petitioner and he continued to work on a reduced consolidated salary of Rs. 25,000/-. The Petitioner has placed on file a letter d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the letter dated 30.06.2013 placed at page 96 of the typed set filed with the Petition. These documents have not been rebutted through any documentary evidence by the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor. It is also on record that even after resignation the Petitioner/ Operational Creditor was retained on a consolidated salary of Rs. 35,000/- per month and it was assured that his arrears of salary would be settled over year end i.e., 31.03.2014. But, the same was not done and a letter of confirmation was issued on 31.03.2014 assuring to the Applicant/ Operational Creditor that the accounts will be settled very shortly in accordance with the terms of the letter of the management dated 30.09.2006. Then, on 30.09.2014 an assurance was given that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect the liability of the arrears of salary of the Petitioner/ Operational Creditor. It has been stated that the employee's dues has been settled and nothing is due. But, interestingly it has been claimed in the reply that the claim of the Petitioner/ Operational Creditor is barred by limitation. The defence taken by the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor is highly contradictory, if the dues of the employee have been settled, and there is nothing outstanding, then, the argument that the claim is barred by lirnitation does not carry any weight. The other defence that has been taken by the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor is that it has paid on 31.07.2015 as arrear of salary. In support of the same, they placed on record 'payment voucher' fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner/ Operational Creditor on 29.06.2017 as has been mentioned hereinabove and the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor has approached the City Civil Court at Chennai on 06.07.2017 and filed the OS.No.36/33/2017 against one M.Sivaram, and N.Subramanian (Operational Creditor), wherein the prayers has been made to declare the notice/ letters dated 30.09.2006, 22.01.2013, 30.06.2013, 31.03.2014 and 30.09.2014 issued by the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor itself as null and void, and not binding on the same and for grant of permanent injunction restraining the Petitioner/ Operational Creditor from relying on or claiming against the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor on the basis said letters. Under para 6 of the 'Plaint' it is clearly mentioned that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arties, peruse the records placed on the file. In totality of the facts and circumstances, we are constrained to conclude that the Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payment arrears of the salary to the Petitioner/ Operational Creditor. The Operational Creditor has complied with requirements under Sections 8, 9 (3) (b) (c) of I&B Code, 2016 and has made out a case for admission of the Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 12. Therefore, we admit the application and we order the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process which ordinarily shall get completed within 180 days, reckoning from the day this order is passed. 13. We appoint Mr. Venkataramanarao Nagarqjan, as IRP, who has been p....