C.P. No. 176/KB/2018

An application under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules,

2016

In the matter of:

Maithan Alloys Limited

...APPLICANT

Versus

Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited and Ors.

...CONTEMNORS/RESPONDENTS

Date of pronouncement of order: 16.04.2024

CORAM:

SMT. BIDISHA BANERJEE, HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

SHRI D. ARVIND, HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Appearances (via Video Conferencing/Physical):

Mr. Zeeshan Haque, Adv. ] For the Applicant in

Ms. Tanvi Luhariwala, Adv. ] IA(I.B.C)/2074(KB)2023

Mr. Supriyo Gole, Adv. ] Ms. Madhuja Barman, Adv. ]

Mr. Shaunak Mukhopadhay, Adv. ] For the Applicant in

Mr. Supriyo Gole, Adv. ] IA(I.B.C)/1617(KB)2023

Ms. Madhuja Barman, Adv. ]

Mr. Joy Saha, Sr. Adv. ] In IA(I.B.C)/2074(KB)2023 Mr. Sidhartha Sharma, Adv. ] For the Respondent No.1 in

Mr. Rishav Dutt, Adv. ] IA(I.B.C)/2074(KB)2023

Ms. Namrata Basu, Adv. ] Mr. Danish Taslim, Adv. ] Mr. S. Mitra, Adv. ]

Mr. Rohit Kumar Keshri, Adv. ] For the Respondent in

Mr. Ankit Chaurasia, Adv. ] IA(I.B.C)/1617(KB)2023

C.P. No. 176/KB/2018 Mr. Devajoyti Barman, Adv. ] For the Respondent in Ms. S.B. Mallick, Adv. ] IA(I.B.C)/1618(KB)2023 Mr. Kaustubh Rai, Adv. ] For the Respondent in ] IA(I.B.C)/738(KB)2021 Mr. Rahul Auddy, Adv. ] For the Liquidator Mr. Aditya Gooptu, Adv. ]

Mr. Samir Kumar Bhattacharya, Adv. ] Liquidator Ms. Deblina Lahiri, Adv. ] For State Bank of India Ms. T. Chetri, Adv. ]

O R D E R

Per: Bidisha Banerjee, Member (Judicial)

1. The Court congregated through a hybrid mode.

2. Ld. Counsels were heard and records were perused.

3. This application has been preferred by Maithon Alloys to seek the following reliefs:

a. To pass an order directing the Respondent No.1 to refund the amount of Rs.11,35,27,000/- to the Applicant, along with interest at 18% p.a. calculated from the date of payment, in compliance with the order dated 05.10.2021;

b. To pass an order directing the Respondent No.1 to refund ACD of Rs.9,37,47,635/- (9,34,91,770 paid on 06/01/2023 and Rs.2,55,865/- paid on 17/02/2023) along with interest @ 18% calculated from the date of payment, which was paid under protest by the Applicant to keep the Corporate Debtor as a going concern;

c. To pass ad-interim order(s) in terms of prayers above;

d. To pass such further and/or other order(s) as this Learned Tribunal may deem fit.

C.P. No. 176/KB/2018 e. The applicant contends that, it had paid an amount of Rs.13,14,73,000/- was for the security deposit and the remaining amount had to be refunded as per the Order dated 05.10.2021 passed by this Hon’ble Tribunal. In addition to the availability of the balance amount, the Respondent had demanded additional amount of Rs.9,37,47,635/-on account of adequacy of consumption deposits which was paid by the Applicant under protest to keep the Corporate Debtor as a going concern. Levy of adequacy of consumption deposits she was erroneous. Hence, Respondent is liable to refund/return the said amount of Rs.9,37,47,635/- paid towards adequacy of consumption deposits along with interest at 18% p.a.

4. It is evident that an IA 748 of 2021 was filed by the Applicant, inter alia, seeking direction upon the Respondent No.1 for restoration of electricity connection of the Corporate Debtor.

5. An Order dated 05.10.2021 (Annexure F) in IA 748 of 2021 records the following as extracted hereunder:

a. IA (IBC) No.748 (KB) 2021 is not on board today. It was taken up for hearing upon being mentioned by the Learned Senior Counsel for the Applicant.

b. The Applicant has filed the present Application seeking the following reliefs:

(i) Direct the Respondent No. 1 to restore the electricity connection of Consumer No. VZM 283 i.e., the Corporate Debtor so that the necessary restoration and repairing work of the company can be done and the Corporate Debtor can be kept as a “going concern.”

C.P. No. 176/KB/2018 (ii) Direct the Respondent No.1 to maintain uninterrupted supply of electricity to the Corporate Debtor from the date of restoration of such supply so that the