TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 1028
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the Adjudicating Authority has rejected Section 9 Application on the ground that there was pre-existing dispute between the parties. 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the Order contends that the notice under Section 8 was sent by an email on 12th November, 2019 and was also sent through registered post which was received on 15th November, 2019 and the Civil Suit filed by the Corporate Debtor on 14th November, 2019 can not be said to be pre-existing dispute so as to reject Application under Section 9 of IBC. It is submitted that there was no pre-existing dispute and amounts were due from 2015. 4. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the Appellant and have perused the record. 5. The Adjudicating Autho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner is not much convincing because the operational creditor through Mr.Bharat Chawla attended the meeting dated 12.11.2019. A civil suit for recovery OF Rs. 9,82,835/- due to higher prices charged by petitioner was filed before Ld. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chandigarh bearing No. CS/2129/2019 dated 14.11.2019 which is still pending. The demand notice was sent after the meeting through email on 12.11.2019 and through registered post on 15.11.2019 after filing of Civil Suit on 14.11.2019. The petitioner after realising the higher prices, vide e-mail dated 23.10.2019 stated that they have reduced the rates. In the meeting held on 12.11.2019, the invoices were shown to the petitioner and he was confronted with the huge difference betwee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dispute between the parties about the rates of the Silica Sand supplied by the petitioner-operational creditor. Whether particular terms and conditions in the agreement were applicable to the parties would be decided by the Civil Court, Chandigarh. Be that at it may, but before this Bench, the application under Section 9 of the Code is not maintainable in present of pre-existing dispute. Reliance has been placed upon by Learned Counsel for the respondent-corporate debtor in the matter of Mobilox Innovations Private Limited Vs. Kirusa Software Private Limited, Civil Appeal No. 9405 of 2017 dated 21.09.2017 and Rajratan Babulal Agarwal Vs. Solartex India Pvt. Ltd. and ORs., Civil Appeal No. 2199 of 2021 decided on 13.10.2022 by Hon'ble Supre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 23rd October, 2019 which was sent by the Appellant themselves much before the demand notice states as follows: "Dear Sir, In reference to ongoing discussions with MD sir & Mr Khanna, we have submitted orders comparison and even if contact details are required, we do not mind sharing as we belief in transparency in all our operations. With changing times and recessive market and downfall in freight rates, we already reduced the rates without being asked by you. On request of MD sir and his assurance and our long term relations, we further reduced the rates as a special case and on condition of special help at this critical need of the hour when on one side DCM is under lockout and our good amount has strucked up their. Mr S....