The court confirmed the admission of a petition under the IBC for CIRP due to operational debt exceeding the threshold, with no pre-existing disputes, establishing the necessity for resolution.

ORDER

(Heard through Hybrid Mode)

1. This petition under Section 9 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short “IBC”) read with Rule 6 of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 has been filed by Sri Keerthi Projects, a partnership firm / operational creditor / Petitioner against Max Transport Limited, Respondent / Corporate Debtor for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor.

2. Part-I of the petition sets out the particulars of the Petitioner Sri Keerthi Projects. It is a partnership firm having its registered office at House No. 3-20-14, Near Recruiting Office, Syamala Nagar, Pattabhipuram, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh – 522 006. It was registered with the Registrar of Firms on 22.09.2007. Part-II of the petition sets out the details of the Corporate Debtor Max Transport Limited. It was incorporated on 20.04.2021 with CIN: U63030TN2021PLC142944 and authorized share capital of Rs. 15,00,000/- and paid up capital of Rs. 5,00,000/-. Its registered office is situated at 156, Doshi Tower, Poonamallee High Road Kilpauk, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 010 within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

3. In Part-III of the petition, the Petitioner has not proposed the name of IRP. Part-IV of the petition provides the particulars of the operational debt i.e. Rs. 2,72,69,115.82 and date of default as 24.07.2023. It is averred that the Operational Debtor had provided interalia the services such as business solutions and support services in the nature of man power, FRT vehicle and FRT labour to the Corporate Debtor as per the orders placed from time to time for the period from January 2023 to December 2023. It raised the invoices from time to time for the services rendered / undertaken in accordance with the orders. It is stated that there was no instance of non-adherence to rendering of services to the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor was also making payments at different intervals but the amount paid was not equal to the amount against each invoice. It is stated that the amounts received from the Corporate Debtor were adjusted to the invoices on FIFO (First in First Out) basis. It is stated that an amount of Rs. 2,72,69,115.82 became due against the following invoices.

It is stated that the date when debt fell due is 24.07.2023. It is stated that the Corporate Debtor utilized the services provided by the Operational Creditor for its financial gains but deliberately failed to make the payments since July 2023. The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice dated 18.03.2024 calling upon the Corporate Debtor to pay the outstanding amount but the Corporate Debtor despite receipt of the notice evaded and completely ignored the demands of the Operational Creditor. It even did not respond to the demand notice in Form 3 issued by the Operational Creditor. The Petitioner has placed the copy of the demand notice as Annexure A1, postal receipt as Annexure A2, postal tracking consignment details of the demand notice as Annexure A3, copy of the purchase orders issued in July 2023, August 2023, October 2023, November 2023 and December 2023 as Annexure A4, copy of invoices as Annexure A5, email correspondences between the period 16.06.2023 and 07.03.2024 as Annexure A6, computation of outstanding amount / default in Tabular form as Annexure A7, record of debt and default issued in Form D by the NeSL as Annexure A8, Form 1A generated on 06.06.2023 for serving the copy of application for initiating CIRP, copy of master data of the Corporate Debtor taken from the official website o