Kanta Mishra vs Shri Abhilash Lal

The Corporate Debtor awarded 3 works to the applicant vide work order dated 19^th of January, 2012 for an amount of Rs. 3,86,87,920/- copy of which is annexed as Annexure- A2

Thereafter on 1^st of October, 2012 parties agreed for construction of a boundary wall. The Corporate Debtor issued service order to the applicant on 9^th of October, 2012 which is annexed as Annexure A-4.

The Corporate Debtor issued letter of intent dated 19^th of January, 2012 for balance of site infrastructure works.

In the meeting conducted on 29^th of November, 2012 the representative of the Corporate Debtor and the applicant agreed for a bonus to the applicant upon satisfactory completion of boundary wall by 31^st of March, 2013. If the boundary wall is not completed within time the bonus will not be paid. Minutes of the meeting are annexed as Annexure- 5.

The applicant completed the work satisfactory and outstanding amount statement was prepared on 17^th of December, 2014. In the service order it was mentioned that the service tax will be paid under composition extra on the awarded work. The Corporate Debtor has not given the service tax extra on the awarded work and also deducted service tax from running bill of the applicant. The Corporate Debtor has violated the terms and conditions of the service order and the Finance Act, 1994.

The Corporate Debtor has submitted the payment certificate to the applicant, the details of which along with the amount are mentioned in Para 10 of the instant application. A copy of payment certificate issued by the Resolution Professional is also annexed as A-8.

The applicant has raised certain disputes regarding the outstanding amount of cutting of trees on 17^th of December, 2014 and has claimed a loss of Rs. 10.50 lakhs.

It is also stated by the applicant in paragraph 14 that the Corporate Debtor completed the work satisfactorily in all respects as per terms and conditions of work order but the Corporate Debtor failed to clear its dues which are mentioned in Paragraph 14 of the instant application.

In paragraph 15, applicant has alleged breach of contractual obligations by the Corporate Debtor.

The applicant on 18^th of January 2021 submitted its claim Form B to the Resolution Professional in which he claimed an amount of Rs. 2,27,47,897.35/- and subsequently modified its claims on 18^th of June, 2020 for an amount of Rs. 2,14,24,617/- in Form B.

In Response to the claims, the Resolution Professional has accepted an amount of Rs. 29,23,208/- and rejected the rest without assigning any reason.

Resolution Professional vide email dated 6^th of March, 2020 requested the applicant herein to provide additional information to review his claims. The Resolution Professional sought the following details

The Resolution Professional could not have granted anything merely based on the assertion on a particular amount against a particular head and without any supporting documents thereto.

The applicant has also submitted written notes of submissions and has stated in the context of Service Tax dues the proof of the said payment would be available with the Corporate Debtor and therefore contention of respondent that applicant has not provided any supporting document is without any justification and it is for the respondent to produce the detailed statement along with supporting documents by which mode and when the payment was made. Therefore respondent be directed to accept a total claim of 2,14,24,617/- along with 15% interest.

This Adjudicating Authority cannot adjudicate upon the question of loss or profit interest etc. This Tribunal in its summary jurisdiction can in no way go into crystallizing the alleged claims. It is clear from the above position the works were executed somewhere in 2015 and the claims have been raised for the first time before the Resolution Professional and that too, as observed by Resolution Professional, without the required documents in support.