Delhi High Court - Orders
Refex Energy Limited & Ors vs M/S Passive Infra Projects Private ... on 24 July, 2024
$~25 & 26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 6673/2019 & CRL.M.A. 43382/2019
REFEX ENERGY LIMITED & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through:
versus
M/S PASSIVE INFRA PROJECTS
PRIVATE LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Puja Dewan & Mr.
Uday Seth, Advocates.
+ CRL.M.C. 6730/2019 & CRL.M.A. 43586/2019
REFEX ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED
& ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Ms. Pratishtha Vij,
Advocate (Through V.C.).
versus
M/S PASSIVE INFRA PROJECTS
PRIVATE LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Puja Dewan & Mr.
Uday Seth, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 24.07.2024
1. The present petition is filed essentially seeking quashing of Complaint Case No.16348/2016 and Complaint Case No.16349/2016.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent had not only filed the present complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 but also initiated proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT'), Chennai in regard to the amount which is allegedly due and payable by This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2024 at 04:08:42 the petitioner to the respondent.
3. She submits that the parties have entered into a composite settlement pursuant to which a sum of ₹1,40,00,000/- has been paid to the respondent/complainant.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the settlement was only in regard to proceedings pending before NCLT and those proceedings have been closed pursuant to the money paid by the petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the money was paid to the respondent only on the understanding that all proceedings will come to an end.
6. She submits that the petitioner had no reason to pay such a huge amount only for the settlement of the proceedings pending before the learned NCLT.
7. She submits that if the respondent is of the view that the settlement was only in regard to the proceedings before the learned NCLT, then the money has been paid on misconception, the amount should be refunded.
8. The learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to take instructions.
9. List on 29.08.2024.
10. A copy of the order be placed in both the matters.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J JULY 24, 2024 'Aman' This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2024 at 04:08:42