TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 12% off sitewide! →✨ Enterprise Access - Extra Savings! Contact: 9911796707 →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court rules in favor of petitioner in coal price dispute, orders payment in installments</h1> <h3>Swapan Kumar Kundu Versus Radharani Tea And Estate (P.) Ltd.</h3> The court found in favor of the petitioner in the winding-up application for the unpaid price of coal sold to the company. The court determined that the ... Winding up - creditor - claim is on account of unpaid price of coal sold and delivered by him to the company – Held that:- notice was replied to by the company by its letter dated August 9, 2010. Without giving any details as to how the claim was paid, the reply to the statutory notice simply stated that the company maintained statements of accounts between the parties and that the petitioning creditor had been paid – Held that:- petitioning creditor will also be entitled to interest on the above sum from the date of the respective invoices at 8 per cent. per annum simple interest till the date of this order. The company will also be liable to pay interest at 10 per cent. per annum on the said sum of principal and interest adjudged up to the date of this order till payment, winding up application is disposed of Issues:Winding up application for unpaid price of coal sold and delivered by the petitioner to the company. Dispute over the acknowledgment documents and limitation period for the claim.Analysis:1. The petitioning creditor claimed unpaid price for coal supplied to two tea estates owned by the company. The total claim amount was specified in the petition and supported by invoices.2. The company replied to the statutory notice by stating that the petitioner had been paid, denying any further liability. The petitioning creditor presented three acknowledgment documents signed by company officials, acknowledging the debt owed to the petitioner.3. The company argued that the claim was barred by limitation, citing the acknowledgment documents and a statement of accounts showing final payment made against one invoice.4. The court analyzed the authenticity of the acknowledgment documents. The company disputed the last document's signatory's authority, but the court found the dispute not bona fide based on previous acknowledgments and lack of action against the signatory.5. However, the court found that the acknowledgments did not extend the limitation period for the claims, rendering the claim for both tea estates time-barred.6. The court also ruled that a specific invoice amount was disputed, reducing the total payable amount. The final admitted amount was calculated and ordered to be paid in monthly installments with interest.7. The court directed the company to pay the admitted amount in installments, with interest, and allowed the petitioner to apply for a formal order in case of default in payment.8. The court relegated the claim for a specific amount to a separate suit, while dismissing other claims for lack of merit.9. The winding-up application was disposed of based on the above findings and directions provided for payment and interest terms.
TaxTMI 
