TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 1153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Corporate Debtor on the ground that the Corporate Debtor committed default in paying the operational debt of Rs. 10,54,179 (Rupees Ten Lakh Fifty-Four Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Nine). 2. The brief facts of the case are that as per the purchase order dated 20.03.2018, the Operational Creditor has sold and supplied Gas Fired Trolley Oven to the Corporate Debtor (the copy of purchase order at Annexure-IV) along with invoice dated 10.08.2018. The Corporate Debtor made payment of next consignment of goods but as far as the goods sold under invoice at Annexure-V are concerned, the part amount is paid and part amount was not paid on the ground that goods were defective. 3. According to the Operational Creditor, vide legal notice d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt that balance payment will be made within next ten and twelve days. According to him, Corporate Debtor did not reply to demand notice under Section 8 of IBC nor pointed out any pre-existing dispute. 7. As against the above, learned PCS for the Corporate Debtor submitted that the debt is actually not admitted. By notice reply dated 22.05.2019, the Corporate Debtor had informed the Operational Creditor that the furnace supplied was of sub-standard quality. According to him, there is a pre-existing dispute regarding goods sold. Corporate Debtor is always ready to pay the balance outstanding amount of Rs. 3,28,800/- provided the Operational Creditor settles the accounts. According to him, this petition is not maintainable as there is a pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erms that sum of Rs. 3,28,800/- is yet to be paid by it to the Operational Creditor. It had raised dispute about quality of the goods nine months after goods were issued by Operational Creditor. According to us, such defence about pre-existing dispute relating to quality of goods is feeble and ineffectual. 11. The Corporate Debtor had admitted that operational debt of Rs. 3,28,800/- is yet to be paid by it to the Operational Creditor. It had received demand notice but did not make the payment. This application is defect free. The Operational Creditor has suggested the name of Mr. Shri Arun Chadha for appointment of IRP against whom no disciplinary proceeding is pending. Hence, we allow this application and admit the Corporate Debtor in C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation of Corporate Debtor Company under Section 33 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the case may be. 4) We hereby appoint Mr. Arun Chadha, having Insolvency Professional Registration. No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00165/2017-18/10334, (E-mail ID: [email protected], Mobile No. 9810286133 to act as an IRP under Section 13(1)(c) of the Code. He shall conduct the Corporation Insolvency Resolution Process as per the provision of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 r.w. Regulation made thereunder: 5) The IRP shall perform all his functions as contemplated, inter-alia, by Sections 17, 18, 20 & 21 of the Code. It is further made clear that all personnel connected with Corporate Debtor, its Promoter or any other person assoc....