TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 652
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....adras Steel & Tubes is the supplier and trader of Gl pipes, MS pipes, ERW pipes etc and has supplied the goods being steel Products being the G.I. Pipe & M.S. ERW as demanded by the Corporate Debtor for which the purchase order has been received in the name of Madras Steel & Tubes from the Corporate Debtor, who is the Authorised Dealer involved in offering a wide range of Air Ventilation System. 3. That the Corporate Debtor has failed to make the payment for the outstanding invoices from February 04, 2014 to May 09, 2014 amounting to Rs. 7,01,815/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifteen Only) the copy of the Purchase Order received by the Proprietorship Firm of the Operational Creditor from the Corporate Debtor and the invoices issued by the Proprietorship Firm of the Operational Creditor for the same alongwith the Delivery Challan and the Copy of the Ledger of Corporate Debtor in the books of accounts of Proprietorship Firm of the Operational Creditor. 4. That the Corporate Debtor is also liable to pay an interest on the outstanding due amounting to Rs. 8,01,346/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs One Thousand Three Hundred Forty Six Only) @ 24% per annum as per the terms of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d every allegation, contention and averment made by Operational Creditor in the petition in extenso as if the same is set out herein should be deemed to be admitted except to the extent expressly admitted hereinafter. That the amount claimed by the operational creditor is not proper and the amount claimed by the operational creditor is false. Further, he says that the operational debt as claimed by the Operational Creditor is frivolous and made as an attempt to damage image and goodwill of the Corporate Debtor in the market. Also, he states that despite of several reminder the Operational Creditor has failed and neglected to take steps to comply to replace the disputed material with in 48 as per the Work Order but the operational creditor fail to comply the same. 3. It is pertinent to note that the Company Petition filed by the Operational Creditor in May,2019 is barred by Limitation as 3 years have already elapsed from the date on which the alleged debt fell due i.e. 09/05/2014. 4. That, the Operational Creditor has claimed an amount of Rs. 15,03,161/ in the company petition filed in this Hon'ble Tribunal which is completely unfounded and without any basis and not in accorda....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ditor then debt will include interest, otherwise, the principal amount is to be treated as the debt which is the liability in respect of the claim which can be made from the corporate debtor. 6. In the present appeals, as we find that principal amount has already been paid and as per agreement no interest was payable, the application filed under Section 9 on the basis of entitlement of interest, were not maintainable. If for delayed payment appellants(s) claim any interest, it will be open to them to move before a court of competent jurisdiction, but initiation of CIRP is not an answer." 7. There is an existence of a prior dispute between the Operational Creditor and Corporate Debtor as regards non-payment of the said Invoice raised by them for non- compliance of the Quality requirement as per the terms and condition of the Supply Contract which is well within the Operational Creditor's knowledge. 8. Clarity on the expression "existence of dispute" is put to rest and confusion regarding the meaning of term "dispute" as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that the term "dispute" is an inclusive one and cannot be restricted to a pending suit or arbitral proceeding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom 18.08.2019 and the above Company Petition being filed on 29.05.2019 is well within limitation and the contention of the Corporate Debtor on that score is liable to be rejected. 5. The next issue raised by the Corporate Debtor is with regard to the payment of interest. It is his contention that the Operational Creditor is not entitled for interest. It is relevant to mention here that there is a stipulation in the invoices raised by the Operational Creditor for payment of interest @ 24% per annum if the payment was not made on due date by the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the contention with regard to the entitlement of the Operational Creditor for interest is also liable to be rejected. 6. The next issue is with regard to the pre-existing dispute. It is observed that the Corporate Debtor did not issue any reply to the Demand Notice nor filed any documents evidencing pre-existing disputes between both parties prior to the Demand Notice and therefore, the plea of pre-existing disputes mentioned by the Corporate Debtor in their reply is only for name sake and is only an afterthought to prevent the admission of the Company Petition. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, this Bench is of t....