Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2024) 03 NCLT CK 3155

Yogesh Hariprasad Barot Sole Proprietor of Yogi Impex vs Creative Merchants Ltd

National Company Law Tribunal · Decided on 22 March 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chitra Hankare, Member (J) · Dr. Velamur G Venkata Chalapathy, Member (T)
CASE NUMBER
C.P. (IB) No. 32 of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 293 words
1.

This application is filed by the applicant to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Creative Merchant Limited. According to applicant the principle of debt is Rs. 1,01,22,902/- while interest is Rs.1,20,26,007/- till 30.07.2022, thus, total debt becomes Rs. 2,21,48,909/-. This debt is in respect of sale of goods to the Corporate Debtor. The default was occurred on 26.12.2015, the applicant issued demand notice on 01.08.2022 along with other documents applicant filed NeSL certificate. In the reply the respondent contended that they have purchased goods worth Rs.1,01,22,902/- from the applicant through bills dated 28.08.2015. They have acknowledged the debt and submitted that as they are not carrying on any business since last 4 years, it is in financial crunch and prayed for passing suitable orders.

2.

NeSL certificate was produced on 29.11.2023.

3.

Heard both the Ld. Counsels.

4.

On perusing the NeSL certificate, it appears that the default amount is mentioned as Rs. 22,14,89,909/- and date of default is mentioned as 01.09.2020. However, in the application the date of default is mentioned as 26.12.2015.

5.

The applicant has not given any reason as to why the notice was issued in the year 2022 for the default occurred in the year 2015. He has also not made any explanation as to how the date of default is changed from 26.12.2015 to 01.09.2020. The respondent also stated its company is not functioning since last 4 years. Still the applicant has not initiated any action for recovery of amount. From the pleadings of both the parties, it appears that this is a collusive petition. As application is filed much beyond limitation period it is barred by limitation.

6.

Hence we pass the following order:

ORDER

Company Petition, i.e. C.P.(IB) No. 32 of 2023 is rejected.