SL No.2 NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH COURT HALL NO: II Special Bench (PHYSICAL HEARING)

CORAM: DR.VENKATA RAMAKRISHNA BADARINATH NANDULA – HON’BLE MEMBER (J)

CORAM: SHRI SATYA RANJAN PRASAD- HON’BLE MEMBER (T)

ATTENDANCE-CUM-ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING OF NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD BENCH, HELD ON 28.02.2023 AT 04.00PM

T RANSFER PETITION NO.
COMPANY PETITION/APPLICATION NO.	CP (IB) No.278/9/HDB/2020
NAME OF THE COMPANY	TA Hydraulics Pvt Ltd
NAME OF THE PETITIONER(S)	Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools Ab
NAME OF THE RESPONDENT(S)	TA Hydraulics Pvt Ltd
UNDER SECTION	9 of IBC

ORDER Order in CP No.278/9/HDB/2020 is pronounced, recorded vide separate sheets.

In the result, the Company Petition is rejected as not maintainable, however, without costs.

Sd/- Sd/-

MEMBER (T) MEMBER (J)

VL IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD. COURT No.II.

CP(IB) No. 278/09/HDB/2020 U/s. 9 of IB Code, 2016 In the matter of:

M/s. Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB, 6428-Jarnverksleden 8, SE-811 34, Sandviken, Sweden.

.. Applicant / Operational Creditor VERSUS M/s TA Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., #59c CIE (Expn), Gandhinagar, Balanagar, Hyderabad – 500 037.

.. Respondent/ Corporate Debtor Date of order : 28th February 2023 CORAM:

Dr. Venkata Ramakrishna Badarinath Nandula, Member (Judicial)

Mr. Satya Ranjan Prasad, Member (Technical)

Counsels present:

For Operational Creditor : Shri Shabbeer Ahmed, Advocate and Aneesh. V., Advocate.

For Corporate Debtor : Shri Sudershan Reddy, Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Hirendranath and Ms. Prakruti Golecha, Advocates.

[PER: BENCH]

ORDER

1. This is an application filed by M/s Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB, Operational Creditor (hereinafter referred to as ‘petitioner’) against M/s. TA Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd, Corporate Debtor (hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent’) praying to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor alleging default in repayment of an operational debt, namely, excess payment mistakenly made by the petitioner to the respondent.

2. The facts as mentioned in the application, in brief, are as follows:

i. That the Operational Creditor required certain material to be procured from the Corporate Debtor. Accordingly, The Corporate Debtor has provided two Quotations to the Operational Creditor bearing Nos. TA/SAPL/QTN/DEV-2/2018-19 and TA/SAPL/QTN/DEV-1/2018-19 dated 04.06.2018 for supply of material at a cost of Rs.2,92,500/- and Rs.72,000/- (Annexure-4).

ii. That the Operational Creditor had issued two Purchase Orders dated

15.06.2018 on the Corporate Debtor for supply of material at a cost of Rs.2,92,500/- and Rs.72,000/- excluding taxes (Annexure-5). Accordingly, the Corporate Debtor has manufactured and delivered the requisite products and after delivery of the said products, the Corporate Debtor has issued two invoices vide Invoice No.151/18- 19 and No.151/18-19 dated 11.01.2019 for an aggregate amount of Rs.4,30,110/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Thousand One Hundred and Ten only) including taxes (Annexure-6).

iii. That the Operational Creditor while making the payment on

13.02.2019 in terms of two invoices raised by the Corporate Debtor, had inadvertently made the payment of Invoice amount in USD instead of INR i.e. an amount of USD 430,110.00 was paid to the Corporate Debtor instead of INR 4,30,110/- at conversion rate of Rs.70.55/- which means, the Operational Creditor had paid an amount of Rs.3,03,44,260 instead of Rs.4,30,110/- to the Corporate Debtor i.e. an excess payment of Rs.2,99,14,150/- approximately was made by the Operational Creditor (Annexure-7).

iv. That the Operational Creditor had requested the Corporate Debtor vide e-mail dated 28.02.2019 to refund the excess amount paid (Annexure-8) and thereafter several e-mails were sent to the Corporate Debtor to that effect (Annexure-9).

v. That the Corporate Debtor had sent an email dated 03.07.2019 to the Operational Creditor, expressing its difficulty

Click Here to Read the rest of this document