TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 1580
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt under Section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Read with Rule 11 of NCLT Rules, 2016 praying the Tribunal to set aside the rejection of part claim of the Applicant Company i.e Rs.28,28,14,013/- and to direct the Respondent to verify and admit the rejected portion of the claim of the Applicant Company amounting to Rs.28,28,14,013/-. 2. Gist of the application: a. It is averred that corporate debtor has applied for HT Connection which was sanctioned by the then Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh (APCPDCL), which is now Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited (TSSPDCL). b. It is averred that as per the agreement between the parties vide HT Service No.SGR 270 dated 09.03.2006, and rev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion Corporation of Andhra Pradesh of the Joint State of Andhra Pradesh had filed Aggregate Revenue Requirement for the year 2001-2002, before Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, set up under the Reforms, Act, 1998. In the month of December, 2020 the then Andhra Pradesh Distribution Companies(DISCOM's) had along with APTRANSCO filed their Joint ARR Applications. Further APTRANSCO in January 2001, filed Tariff proposal for the year 2001-2002 for its transmission and bulk supply business and jointly with each DISCOM proposal for distribution and rental supply business. g. It is averred that the Tariff proposal also contained a proposal for levying of wheeling charge of Rs.1/- per Kwh for energy it transmitted through its netw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....04.2021 and Shri Krishna Mohan Gollamudi, was appointed as liquidator, Applicant Company filed Form C with the liquidator. k. It is averred that liquidator vide email dated 06.07.2021 informed that an amount of Rs.3,72,08,961/- is admitted on account of CC charges and the remaining amount of Rs.28,28,14,013/- is not admitted since an amount of Rs. 2,55,74,798/- claimed towards wheeling charges for the power supplied by Rail Calcining and the balance amount of Rs.24,72,39,515/- claimed towards wheeling charges for the power supplied by the third parties. l. It is averred by the Applicant Company that it had provided valid clarifications and explanations to the liquidator. Further submitted that on perusal of Rule 17 of IBBI Regulations....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Application and Open Access Agreement entered into by the Corporate Debtor states that the Corporate Debtor should pay the wheeling charges for availing power from captive and third party providers. n. It is averred that the Applicant Company has followed the due procedure as per the Electricity Act and the APSE Board, 1985. o. Hence the Applicant Company prayed this Adjudicating Authority to issue direction to the liquidator to process the balance amount of the Claim placed by the Applicant Company and proceed accordingly in the interest of Justice and equity. 3. Reply filed by the Respondent: a. It is averred that the averments made by the Applicant Company are false and baseless and is liable to be rejected. b. At the ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts with regard to Rain Calcining Limited and other Third Parties are placed on record to demonstrate existence of liability. Further stated that Corporate Debtor did not had any Wheeling Agreement with the Applicant. g. Thus the respondent prayed the Tribunal to dismiss the Application with exemplary costs and pass the order that deems fit by the Adjudicating Authority. 4. This is an application filed by Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, seeing direction to the RP to verify and process balance portion of the claim of the Applicant Company amounting to Rs.5,42,58,876/-. 5. Before we go into the merits of the case, at the outset it may be stated that the Appeal against an order rejecting the claim by the liqu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....use for not making the application and/or preferring the Appeal, within the time prescribed. Although, it is the general practice to make a formal application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in order to enable the Court or Tribunal to weigh the sufficiency of the cause for the inability of the appellant/applicant to approach the Court/Tribunal within the time prescribed by limitation, there is no bar to exercise by the Court/Tribunal of its discretion to condone delay, in the absence of a formal application it is not always necessary to file an application for condonation of delay before the Court or Tribunal, and delay can be condoned even in the absence of the Application under Section 5 of Limitation Act. 9. Therefore, th....