Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Power2SME v. PSRAQUA Appeal FINAL
Power2SME v. PSRAQUA Appeal FINAL
MEMO OF PARTIES
IN THE MATTER OF:
ALSO AT:
VERSUS
APPELLANT
THROUGH
PANKAJ BHAGAT
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
N29-A, LGF, JANGPURA EXTENSION
NEW DELHI-110 014
PH: 01143521415, 8800791415,9871441415
jalpalegal@gmail.com
DATED: 18.03.2021
NEW DELHI
2
BRIEF SYNOPSIS
to be admitted......"
principle that if the debt is more than one (01) lakh and
be admitted.
admitted."
3
"20 It is also clear that the Corporate Debtor has not paid the
amount due and more than Rs.1 (one) lac. The Application is
No order as to costs."
aforesaid debt is due and payable and has not been paid, in
12. The Respondent disputed that the alleged debt is not the
Authority.
The above quoted verdict has been passed by this Hon’ble Appellate
I&B Code.
Software (P) Ltd (2018) 1 SCC 353 which had observed that
Process..."
no dispute, whatsoever.
dismissed?
Ld. NCLT Delhi not in error of law in not even dealing with the
fact that the Ld. NCLT, New Delhi seems to have erred on facts
(ii) That the respondent had evidently admitted its dues and
(iii) That the respondent, apart from the above two cheques,
got dishonored.
following reasons:
bounced.
laws.
Rs. 12.5 lakhs. Thus, having said so, since there is clear
upon it and the debt. Thus, the Respondent having admitted the
that the said issue is what has been considered to be the alleged
‘pre-existing dispute’ wherein the said Rs. 12.5 Lakhs has been
debit note of Rs. 12.5 Lakhs or the quantum of Rs. 12.5 Lakhs
nor any dispute for the invoices raised and the goods supplied,
further goods were not supplied for the fresh purchase order.
sought has till date not been disputed including in the reply
and the entire transactions between the parties were for supply
12
of material and the same was neither a running contract nor
no rationale for not paying for the invoices against which there
In view of the same, CIRP ought to have been initiated against the
CAUSE TITLE
ALSO AT:
POWER2SME PRIVATE LIMITED
PLOT NO. 88, UDYOG VIHAR PHASE IV,
GURUGRAM, HARYANA – 122015 …APPELLANT
VERSUS
PRIVATE LIMITED’.
17
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
appellant.
Law Tribunal.
6. LIMITATION
The impugned order was passed by the adjudicating authority
within limitation.
basis.
ANNEXURE A3.
the respondent.
ix.
21
x. The Respondent, issued purchase orders demanding
ANNEXURE A4.
32,08,640 32,08,640
23
xii. That the Appellant made several reminder/requests demanding
but to the dismay of the appellant, the respondents still has not
as ANNEXURE – A6
Respondent Company.
7.
Ltd. filed C.P (IB) No. 248 of 2020 against PSR Aqua and
marked as ANNEXURE A 8.
A9.
xxv. That after hearing the counsel for both the parties the
A 11.
26
xxvi. The Respondent filed its written arguments on
as ANNEXURE A12.
the Appellant.
Only) for payment and adjusted the debit note of Rs. 12.5
liability/debt.
complete satisfaction?
is merely an afterthought?
9. GROUNDS OF APPEAL:
the debt is more than one (01) lakh and admitted by the
under:
Hon'ble Tribunal:
ANNEXURE A16
ANNEXURE A17.
2018 wherein:
A19&A20 respectively.
payment and adjusted the debit note of Rs. 12.5 lakhs. Kind
its debt.
further goods were not supplied for the fresh purchase order.
payments are being sought has till date not been disputed
time and the entire transactions between the parties were for
37
supply of material and the same was neither a running
invoices against which there are neither any disputes nor any
the reason as stated in the debit note is also for non supply of
dispute.
MoM dated 16.02.2018 states about the debit note raised i.e
Absolute”.
any consensus nor ever agreed between the parties that non-
does not relate to the goods supplied and the invoices raised,
same.
40
t. That the Ld. Adjudicating Authority failed to appreciate that
invoices raised.
the perusal of which would clearly show that the said website
pertaining to the FIR. It is clear from the same that the said
alleged whatsapp chat with one Mr. Dheeraj who is not even
and soon a day after the Respondents got the said complaint
Respondent.
Anr. v. Tata Aircraft Limited (1970 (3) SCR 127), Satish Batra
136}, ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., (2003) 5 SCC 705, M.C.
Luthra vs. Ashok Kumar Khanna 2018 (248) DLT 161, Rajbir
14.05.2018 etc. are relied upon wherein all the courts in our
ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., (2003) 5 SCC 705, M.C. Luthra
vs. Ashok Kumar Khanna 2018 (248) DLT 161, Rajbir Singh
OTHER TRIBUNAL
THROUGH
PANKAJ BHAGAT
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
N29-A, LGF, JANGPURA EXTENSION
NEW DELHI-110 014
PH: 01143521415, 8800791415,9871441415
jalpalegal@gmail.com
DATED: 18.03.2021
NEW DELHI
APPELLANT
THROUGH
PANKAJ BHAGAT
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
N29-A, LGF, JANGPURA EXTENSION
NEW DELHI-110 014
PH: 01143521415, 8800791415,9871441415
jalpalegal@gmail.com
DATED: 18.03.2021
NEW DELHI
47
VERIFICATION
DEPONENT
48
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AT NEW DELHI
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
COMPANY APPEAL (A.T) INSOLVENCY NO. OF 2021
AFFIDAVIT
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
contents of the above certificate are true and correct to the best of
DEPONENT
49
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AT NEW DELHI
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
COMPANY APPEAL (A.T) INSOLVENCY NO. OF 2021
the same is not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
able to file the certified copy of the same along with the
present appeal.
present appeal.
50
PRAYER
the appellant from filing the certified copy of the impugned order.
Any other relief that this Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal deems fit and
APPELLANT
THROUGH
PANKAJ BHAGAT
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
N29-A, LGF, JANGPURA EXTENSION
NEW DELHI-110 014
PH: 01143521415, 8800791415,9871441415
jalpalegal@gmail.com
DATED:
NEW DELHI
51
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AT NEW DELHI
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
COMPANY APPEAL (A.T) INSOLVENCY NO. OF 2021
AFFIDAVIT
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
contents of the above certificate are true and correct to the best of
DEPONENT
52
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AT NEW DELHI
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
COMPANY APPEAL (A.T) INSOLVENCY NO. OF 2021
INDEX
1. Memo of Parties
4. ANNEXURE A 1
5. ANNEXURE A 2
6. ANNEXURE A3
7. ANNEXURE A4
8. ANNEXURE A5
9. ANNEXURE A6
53
Copy of cheque dated 24.10.2018 issued by the
respondent.
10. ANNEXURE A7
11. ANNEXURE A8
12. ANNEXURE A9
APPELLANT
THROUGH
PANKAJ BHAGAT
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT
N29-A, LGF, JANGPURA EXTENSION
NEW DELHI-110 014
PH: 01143521415, 8800791415,9871441415
jalpalegal@gmail.com
DATED: 18.03.2021
NEW DELHI