TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 12
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) as the Operational Creditor against the Respondent as the Corporate Debtor for the resolution of an amount of Rs. 101,89,178.77/- has been dismissed. 2. The Appellant and Respondent executed 3 Sale Contracts dated 21.04.2021 (first Contract), 19.11.2021 (second Contract) and 14.02.2022 (third Contract). 3. The first Contract bearing No. S00128/2021-2022 was qua delivery of 440 MT of Tanzania Origin Soya Bean, New Crop 2021, NON-GMO for an amount of Rs. 2,64,00,000/-. There was an extension of Sale Contract 1 by Contract 1-A bearing No. S00128A for delivery of 228 MT of Tanzania Origin Soya Bean, New Crop 2021, NON-GMO for Rs. 13,66,622.40/-. The Contract 2 bearing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich was contested by the Respondent. 6. On the other hand, the case of the Respondent is that it had imported the agriculture commodities asking the Appellant by making the payment to the Suppliers. But the Appellant has neglected to take delivery of goods despite repeated request made verbally through mail as well as WhatsApp messages. The Tribunal took into account various WhatsApp messages (chat between the parties) and concluded that there was a Pre-Existing Dispute, therefore, the Petition under Section 9 was not maintainable. 7. In this regard, the relevant observations made by the Learned Tribunal is hereby reproduced for a quick glance: "22. Therefore, it is evident that all these 7 containers were there, but it is the Operatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... loss to be shared by the Corporate Debtor in view of the fact that it was his customer that changed his mind ("bean liya tha buyer palat gya...") 25. Thus it is evident that the Corporate Debtor executed Contract-III which the Operational Creditor failed to lift. There is further conversation with respect to the waiting for the market to improve etc. Thus, it is evident that even though the Corporate Debtor has failed to respond to the Demand Notice or the emails sent by the Operational Creditor, the WhatsApp conversation, and certain emails of the operational creditor are contrary to the case made out by the Petitioner in the present Company petition. From the perusal of the conversation itself its evident that there is already a pre-ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l that the adjudicating authority is to see at this stage is whether there is a plausible contention which requires further investigation and that the "dispute" is not a patently feeble legal argument or an assertion of fact unsupported by evidence. It is important to separate the grain from the chaff and to reject a spurious defence which is mere bluster. However, in doing so, the Court does not need to be satisfied that the defence is likely to succeed. The Court does not at this stage examine the merits of the dispute except to the extent indicated above. So long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the adjudicating authority has to reject the application." In the present case, the Operationa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is not the object of the IBC that CIRP should be initiated to penalize solvent companies for non-payment of disputed dues claimed by an operational creditor" 28. In the light of the above discussion as well as the law laid down in the afore cited case, we are of the considered view that the present Petition deserves to be dismissed. Otherwise also the present petition seems to be nothing but a process of recovery being used by the operational creditor hence it is not an appropriate forum. 29. In view of the presence circumstances, we deem it appropriate to dismiss the present petition. Accordingly, the present C.P. (I.B) No. 1030/MB/2023 petition is dismissed." 8. Counsel for the Appellant has vehemently argued that the WhatsApp messag....