MANIT STEEL Vs. AMRAPALI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Petition is for seeking to invoke the provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Petitioner herein claims that it is engaged in the trading of iron and steel and in the normal course of its business based on the purchase orders placed by the Respondent/Corporate Debtor for the supply of TMT steel bars, had supplied the same and raised invoices/bills. It is further claimed by the Petitioner that payments received from the Respondent/Corporate Debtor in relation to the invoices raised, had been duly reflected in the accounts of the Petitioner. However, despite the same, there yet remains a sum of Rs. 1,22,76,607/- payable on 31.3.2016 and even though repeated demands were made to the Respondent/Corporate Debtor to clear the balance outstanding it was not done. In relation to the balance outstanding and with a view to clear the same and thereby discharge their legal liability, at least partially, Respondent/Corporate Debtor had issued a number of cheques drawn on its bankers namely Bank of Maharashtra, Noida Branch, Sector-62. Despite the issue of cheques and promise of honouring the same, the Respondent/Corporate Debtor repeatedly requested not to present the cheques for encashment on the respective due dates. However, since tne Petitioner - Operational Creditor was seriously affected by the above attitude shown by the Corporate Debtor, protested about the same which prompted the Corporate Debtor to request Respondent to present the remaining cheques which had not become stale for encashment.

(2.) However, when the cheques were presented, the same were dishonoured for the reason " payment stopped" which clearly shows malicious intention and fraud sought to be played upon the Operational Creditor by the Corporate Debtor. In the circumstances', it is claimed by the Petitioner that a legal notice dated 26.9.2016 was issued on the Corporate Debtor under Section 434(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up and the same was followed up in view of lack of response on the part of the Corporate Debtor with a winding up Petition filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in CP No.28/2017. Subsequently, in view of notice having not been served on the Respondent the said Petition came to be transferred to this Tribunal vide order passed by the Hon'ble High Court dated 22.2.2017. Consequent to the transfer from the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the same was listed before this Tribunal on 22.3.2017. On subsequent dates the Petitioner was directed to comply with the provisions of IBC,2016 and the Attendant Rules framed there under. In compliance with the same, it is seen that the Petitioner has filed a compliance affidavit dated 21.4.2017 wherein a copy of the demand notice dated 28.3.2017 has been enclosed along with the tracking report in proof of delivery of the Section 8 notice under the provisions of IBC,2016 as required to be necessarily issued to the Operational Creditor. It is further seen that in addition to compliance dated 21.4.2017, a further additional compliance affidavit of service of notice of the above application alongwith tracking report in proof of having served the notice of application has also been filed by the Petitioner. Despite the above service of notice, it is seen that no appearance has been put up by the Corporate Debtor.

(3.) On a perusal of the document, it is seen that the liability on the part of the Corporate Debtor has arisen in relation to the following purchase orders placed for the purpose of supply of TMT steel in different dimensions:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_131_LAWS(NCLT)9_2017_1.html</FRM>