ORDER

Per: Manoj Kumar Dubey, Member (Technical) 1. The present petition is filed on 18.11.2021 under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity ‘IBC’/Code), r/w. Rule 6 of the I&B (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules 2016, by M/s Brahmis Steel Private Limited (for brevity ‘Operational Creditor/Petitioner’) inter alia seeking to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against M/s. Ambient Controls Private Limited (hereinafter referred as ‘Corporate Debtor/Respondent) on the ground that the Corporate Debtor has committed a default for a total outstanding amount of Debt of Rs.

3,27,96,405/- (Rupees Three Crore Twenty Seven Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Four Hundred and Five Only), as per Part IV of Form No.5 filed with the petition. 2. Brief facts of the case, which are relevant to the issue in question, and as narrated by the Petitioner are as follows: a. The petitioner M/s Brahmis Steel is partnership firm registered under MSME Act and are engaged in the business of trading branded steel which is used for various construction activities. b. The Respondent herein is a private limited company registered under Companies Act, 1956 and is into the business of construction of industrial sheds. c. The Petitioner has been a regular supplier of steel which is required by the Respondent/Corporate Debtor to construct Industrial Shed. Further, the business between the parties stared in 2014, when the Respondent/Corporate Debtor purchased the materials for the first time on 16.11.2015. d. However, during the period starting from 08.04.2017 to 19.03.2018 thirteen (13) invoices become overdue. Further the petitioner demanded for the due amount several times through various modes of communication i.e mail, phone calls, WhatsApp Messages and Letters. Moreover, when the concerns was raised by the Petitioner, the respondent committed to fulfil his obligations. e. Further, the petitioner issued Demand Notice under section 8 of IBC, 2016. The First notice was sent on 23.07.2021, where in the respondent through their reply letter dated 07.08.2021 conveniently commented only for part of the transaction and part of the payment. Subsequently the Operational Creditor issued a second notice on 19.08.2021 seeking explanations on all the outstanding invoices including all the opening balances. The respondent however failed to reply within the relevant time frame ending on 29.07.2021. f. However, on 18.09.2021, the respondent sent a notice disputing the Quality of Service and Quantity of Materials supplied by the Petitioner. It is submitted that the reply had reached the petitioner 20 days after the expiry of time over a period of 6 years and after issuing two demand notices under Section 8 of IBC, 2016, a dispute regarding quality and quantity were made. g. It is submitted that despite several opportunities given to the Respondent to pay the due amount, the Respondent failed to pay the admitted dues, hence the petitioner has filed this instant Application. 3. The Learned Counsel for the respondent filed its statement of objection vide diary no. 4055 on 26.09.2022 contenting the following: a. It is submitted that, as per the claim made by the Petitioner the alleged amount due is for the period between 08.04.2017 to 19.03.2018, however, the above petition was filed on November, 2021, therefore barred by limitation. b. Further, it is contented that, in numerous invoices raised by the petitioner did not have test certificate nor did not meet the requisite yield strength i.e., the steel of requiste standard and grade was not supplied.. And the said concern has been raised by the respondent to the petitioner in reply to the demand notice. 4. Rebutting the contention raised by the respondent, the petitioner submits that the as per the provisions of Limitation Act as concern, petition is well within the time limit as per Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 10.01.2022 for M