TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1375
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dha, Gunadala, Eluru Road, Vijaywada, Andhra Pradesh - 520004 (2) The Authorized share capital is Rs. 15,00,00,00,000.00 and paid-up share capital is Rs. 454,43,96,950.00. The Corporate Debtor was registered on 29.12.1998 holding Identification Number U31909AP1998SGC030805. (3) The total amount of Rs. 3,79,61,269/- up to 31.05.2016 as per the claim petition is due to Operational Creditor as stated in the Petition. (4) It is averred in the Petition that Operational Creditor vide claim Petition dated 20.07.2001, claimed an amount of Rs. 40,25,648/- up to 30.06.2001 (for 1-45 Bills), on account of interest for the delayed payment for the price of goods (Aluminium Alloy Conductors) delivered to the Corporate Debtor against the Purchase order No. CEP/EP3/A1/CEBT -1937/97/PM-9373, dated 25.05.1998 under the provisions of the Interest on Delayed payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 before Industry-Facilitation Council, Haryana (Haryana Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council). The present Petition is only with reference to 26-45 Bills and the claim amounting to Rs. 29,74,071/- (being the interest for the delay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) No. 187/2017 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 13.01.2017 vacated the orders passed by the Execution Court in view of preliminary issue to be decided by Hon'ble ADJ, Chandigarh and the same to be complied by the Corporate Debtor as per Section 19 of MSMED Act, 2006 and has further held the Execution Petition will revive only after adjudication of the controversy by the District Judge. (10) Further to Arbitral Counsil vide Interim Order dated 06.09.2017 dismissed the operational Creditor's Application by stating that the claim amount on account of interest is a recurring amount (compound interest) and can be determined only at the time of making final payment. (11) EP 33/2016 was later transferred to the Commercial Court, Hyderabad and renumbered as CEP.41/2017 and finally dismissed by Hon'ble Commercial Court, Hyderabad vide order dated 20.11.2017. (12) The Operational Creditor issued demand notice in Form 3 of I & B (AAA) Rules to the Corporate Debtor and demanded to pay unpaid operational debt to the Operational Creditor by placing reliance on Award dated 21.06.2010. 3. The Corporate Debtor filed a counter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hereon. (6) It is also contended that the Operational Creditor filed EP No.33 of 2016 before Hon'ble Second Additional Chief Judge City Civil Court at Hyderabad for enforcement of Award dated 21.06.2010 including invoices mentioned at Sl. Nos. 1 to 25 which was held as barred by law of limitation by the Council. It is contended that attachment orders dated 30.06.2016 passed by Second Additional Chief Judge Court at Hyderabad in respect of the total claim amount 1 to 45 bills by wrongly calculating the same knowing full well that the claim Nos 1 to 25 were held as barred by law of limitation by the Council. (7) Aggrieved by the said order dated 30.06.2016, the Hon'ble High Court at Hyderabad, vide its orders dated 07.12.2016 has partly allowed the order dated 30.06.2016 and confirmed the order in respect of item Nos. 26 to 45. Further, it is contended that Hon'ble Apex Court vide its order dated 13.01.2017 vacated the order passed by the executing court and directed District Court at Chandigarh to decide the Arb Case No. 580 of 2010 After transfer of the case before the Addl Chief Judge CCC at Hyderabad it was renumbered as CEP No. 41 of 2017 which was also dismiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the Hon'ble Apex Court on some grounds in the past. The dispute is centred around the quantum of liability. The dispute is still existing which is evident from the records placed. In this background the Tribunal has to see whether the Petition is liable to be admitted or not. 6. The claim of the Operational Creditor said to have been payable by the Corporate Debtor is Rs. 3,79,61,269/- as on 31.05.2016 in respect of bills raised by the Operational creditor against the Corporate Debtor bearing Nos. 26 to 45. According to the Petitioner, this is the amount said to have been committed default by the Corporate Debtor. The case of Petitioner that an Award was passed in favour of Petitioner on 21.06.2010 by Haryana Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council for Rs. 29,74,071/- with an interest @ 18% etc. 7. It is the case of Petitioner that Execution Petition was filed for an amount of Rs. 3,79,61,269/- for realisation of the amount in CEP 15 of 2018 on the file of Commercial Court, Hyderabad, wherein prohibitory orders was passed against Garnishee. 8. The contention of the learned Counsel for Petitioner is that Operational Creditor by virtue of passing of award in its f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons Private Limited versus Kirusa Software Private Limited which held that so long as a dispute truly exists in fact and is not spurious, hypothetical or illusory, the Adjudicating Authority has to reject the Application. 14. So, the next question calls for consideration whether there exist a dispute when notice of Demand was issued to the Corporate Debtor. The contention of the learned Senior Counsel for Corporate Debtor that serious dispute regarding quantum of liability was pending for adjudication. The contention of the ld. Senior Counsel that Operational Creditor is fully aware of the matter being pending before the Hon'ble District Court at Chandigarh. The present Petition is filed when matter was pending before Hon'ble District Court at Chandigarh which was transferred to II ACJ, Hyderabad bearing EP 61/2011 which was ultimately dismissed and matter was again remanded to the District Court following the order passed by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and Hon'ble ADJ observed that the amount under the award was Rs. 24,50,046/- and further directed the corporate Debtor to deposit 75% of the amount decided under the Award and the Corporate Debtor has deposited the same a....