Srishaila Constructions Private Limited filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Marg Limited, seeking to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The application was based on an alleged operational debt of Rs. 6,68,12,000/-. The Corporate Debtor argued that the application was barred by limitation, as the debt was time-barred. The Operational Creditor claimed that a letter dated 28.12.2015 served as an acknowledgment of the debt.
Srishaila Constructions Private Limited (Operational Creditor) claimed that M/s. Marg Limited (Corporate Debtor) owed them Rs. 6,68,12,000/- for construction and piling work at Karaikal Port. The Operational Creditor submitted work orders, invoices, and a reconciliation statement as evidence of the debt. The Corporate Debtor allegedly acknowledged the debt in a meeting in June 2015 and offered machinery worth Rs. 30,00,000/- to offset the debt. The Operational Creditor claimed that a letter dated 28.12.2015 confirmed the outstanding balance after adjusting for the machinery. The Corporate Debtor denied liability, claiming the debt was time-barred and the letter was fabricated. The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice on 30.11.2019, which the Corporate Debtor
…Sign in to view the parties.
Construction o…
Construction of OSV…
Srishaila Constructions Private Limited filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Marg Limited, seeking to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The application was based on an alleged operational debt of Rs. 6,68,12,000/-. The Corporate Debtor argued that the application was barred by limitation, as the debt was time-barred. The Operational Creditor claimed that a letter dated 28.12.2015 served as an acknowledgment of the debt.
Srishaila Constructions Private Limited (Operational Creditor) claimed that M/s. Marg Limited (Corporate Debtor) owed them Rs. 6,68,12,000/- for construction and piling work at Karaikal Port. The Operational Creditor submitted work orders, invoices, and a reconciliation statement as evidence of the debt. The Corporate Debtor allegedly acknowledged the debt in a meeting in June 2015 and offered machinery worth Rs. 30,00,000/- to offset the debt. The Operational Creditor claimed that a letter dated 28.12.2015 confirmed the outstanding balance after adjusting for the machinery. The Corporate Debtor denied liability, claiming the debt was time-barred and the letter was fabricated. The Operational Creditor issued a demand notice on 30.11.2019, which the Corporate Debtor
…Construction o…
Construction of OSV…