National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Tesla Controls Private Limited vs Pace Electricals Private Limited on 13 November, 2024
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AT CHENNAI
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 80/2022
In the matter of:
Tesla Controls India Pvt. Ltd.
'Emsy Square', Plot No. 4 to 8,
Saranya Nagar Layout,
Kundrathur, Thirumudivakkam Main Road,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu, PIN-600 044 ...Appellant
V
Pace Electricals Pvt. Ltd.
Regd Off: 4 Mes Road,
Off Jalahalli Camp Cross, Yeshwantpur,
Bangalore-560 022 ...Respondent
Present :
For Appellant : Mr. K. Sureshkumar, Advocate
For Respondent : Ms. Janani Shankar, Advocate
JUDGMENT
(Hybrid Mode) [Per: Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)] Brief and short facts, which are involved in the instant Company Appeal, are that the Appellant being an operational creditor herein puts a challenge to the Impugned Order, as it was rendered in CP(IB) No. 33/BB/2021, in which the proceeding under Section 9 of I & B Code of 2016, was decided by the order dated 31.03.2021, in which the Learned Adjudicating Authority held that, since part of the claim has already been paid and the remaining amount to be paid as claimed by the appellant is about Rs. 33 Lakhs which is stated to be the interest, no strong case has been made out against corporate debtor, prima facie that it has become insolvent and Comp. App. (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 80/2022 Page 1 of 5 therefore provisions of the I & B Code cannot be invoked and accordingly disposed of the company petition directing the Respondent to settle the balance claim of the Petitioner/Appellant herein, as per the evidence available on record, within three months, failing which the petitioner is at the liberty to approach it in accordance with law.
The relevant part of the order is extracted hereunder:
"6. For the aforesaid reasons, circumstances of the case, and the Law on the issue, C.P. (IB) No.33/BB/2021 is hereby disposed of by directing the Respondent to settle the claim of the Petitioner, as per records and evidence available on record, within a period of three months from the date of receipt copy of this order, failing which, the Petitioner is at liberty to approach this Adjudicating Authority by filing appropriate Petition in accordance with law. No order as to costs".
2. When the appeal was entertained and the Respondent was noticed, the Respondent appeared and filed an application being IA No. 713/2024, invoking provisions contained under Rule 11 read with Rule 31 of NCLAT Rules 2016, for taking certain additional documents on record. Particularly the copy of the order which was rendered by Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Chennai Region, in a proceeding which was held being MSEFC/CR/196/2020, which stood decided vide its order dated 13.09.2021. Comp. App. (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 80/2022 Page 2 of 5
3. Today when the matter was taken up, the appellant submitted that he had issued the demand notice under Section 8 of I & B Code for the amount claimed prior to invoking of proceeding under Section 9 of I & B Code. He admits that the respondent has already remitted part of the amount and the balance amount is yet to be paid and as NCLT dismissed his Section 9 application, he has filed this appeal. On the contrary, the respondent has submitted that the appellant has not approached this Tribunal with clean hands, because he simultaneously moved MSEFC on 15.06.2020 under Section 18(1) of MSME Act, for recovery of the said amounts, MSEFC in its order being MSEF/CR/196/2020 dated 13.09.2021 finally disposed of the case as dismissed and pendency of the same has not been brought to the knowledge of this Tribunal, as well as the NCLT, when the proceeding under Section 9 of I & B Code, 2016 was being decided. She further submitted that, in pursuance to the impugned order of NCLT dated 31.03.2021 he has remitted an amount of Rs. 23,83,940/- to the Appellant in July 2021 and has finally settled matter as per directions of Ld. NCLT which has also been recorded in the order dated 13.09.2021 of MSEFC while dismissing the case.
4. The appellant has disputed the quantification of the amount payable, by the respondent and has contended that, the full amount as per the claim raised under Section 8 demand notice under I & B Code, 2016 has not been remitted and that the amount deposited is on the basis of the order of MSEFC dated 13.09.2021, which does not appropriately satisfy the demand raised by Comp. App. (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 80/2022 Page 3 of 5 the appellant in Section 8 demand notice. Be that as it may. Since there is a dispute in respect of the size of the claim between the Appellant and the Respondent, and if the Appellant feels that the directions given by the Hon'ble NCLT, in its order dated 31.03.2021 to the respondent to settle the claim of the Appellant within three months has not been complied with, the Appellant can very well approach the Ld. NCLT with an appropriate application to redress his grievances including determination of the amount that needs to be paid by the Respondent for which the Ld. NCLT has already granted liberty.
5. Since the issue involves consideration of evidence and facts, and also scrutiny of documents to arrive at the balance amount to be paid to the Appellant and also consideration of the order dated 13.09.2021 of MSEFC, Chennai Region, it is best done at the level of Hon'ble NCLT, Bengaluru Bench, which has itself left it open for the Appellant to re-approach it, to raise his grievances if, he is dissatisfied with the amount, which has been paid by the Respondent. The issue of determination of amount is still left wide open to be decided by the Hon'ble NCLT, owing to the observations made in para 6 of the judgment 31.03.2021, as extracted above. Accordingly, this 'Company Appeal' would stand 'disposed of', with the liberty left open for the Appellant to invoke the liberty which has been granted in para 6 of the order of Ld. NCLT and to raise all his claim, as per law, which will then be considered and adjudicated upon by the Hon'ble NCLT, after considering Comp. App. (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 80/2022 Page 4 of 5 the implication of the order of MSEFC, Chennai region bearing No. MSEFC/CR/196/2020, dated 13.09.2021.
6. Subject to the aforesaid liberty granted to the Appellant to approach the Hon'ble NCLT, the appeal lacks merit and the same is accordingly 'dismissed' [Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial) [Jatindranath Swain] Member (Technical) 13.11.2024 SN/TM/MS Comp. App. (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 80/2022 Page 5 of 5