9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the date on which the instalment becomes due. The learned Company Judge was therefore justified in holding that since the appellant has filed the company petition only on 17-3-2005, therefore, the parties would go back three years from the said date with reference to the date when the instalment was belatedly paid by BHEL. So far as acknowledgements pointed out by the appellant in the letters dated 17-4-2001 and 11-10-2002, are concerned, in our considered opinion, the same could not be interpreted and construed to be any acknowledgement in any manner. The aforesaid letters only indicate that what was communicated was only a statement that the claim of the appellant would be looked into. No merit in appeal X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the same. It is further clarified that HCL will pay interest for the delay in obtaining receipt of lease rentals from BHEL pursuant to the performance under the lease agreement at 2 per cent per month after 30 days from the respective due dates until payment thereof and further HCL will also make good to MLL the short fall, if any, in the respective lease rental due and payable together with interest at 2 per cent per month till the date of payment." 4. By the aforesaid clause, the respondent has given assurance of payment of lease rentals which was due and payable every quarter by BHEL to be paid to the appellant directly. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that there are other agreements also between the parties with an identical clause. In the aforesaid company petition the dispute arose with regard to liability of payment of interest by the respondent-company to the appellant on the delayed payment of lease instalments by BHEL, as per clause 4 of the aforesaid agreement dated 11/12-11-1998. In terms of the said clause there was a liability to pay interest at 2 per cent per month to the appellant for any default/delay in payment of instalment by BHEL beyond 30 day ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into force immediately and shall remain in full force and effect and shall continue to be enforceable until all the dues of MLL are fully paid to the satisfaction of MLL and a certificate of satisfaction as and when issued by MLL shall be conclusive proof to that effect. 5. HCL undertakes to pay MLL the amount due under this agreement immediately on demand notwithstanding any disputes raised by and between itself and BHEL and also any suit or proceeding pending before the court or Tribunal and the liability of HCL under these presents is absolute and unequivocal." 6. Strong reliance was placed by the appellant on clause 4 of the aforesaid agreement. Reliance was also placed by the appellant on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Food Corporation of India v. Assam State Co-operative Marketing & Consumer Federation Ltd. [2004] 12 SCC 360. 7. Mr. V.N. Koura, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, however, refuted the aforesaid submissions contending, inter alia, that there was no acknowledgement as sought to be made out by the appellant and, therefore, the order passed by the learned Company Judge is legal and valid. He also submitted that on a proper interpreta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest at 2 per cent per month, after 30 days from the respective due date of payment until payment and short fall in the lease rental with interest at 2 per cent per month till the date of payment. On going through the records we also find that the finding of the learned Company Judge that the cause of action for default of each instalment arose separately is justified. The period of limitation for any recovery is three years commencing from the date on which the instalment becomes due. The learned Company Judge was therefore justified in holding that since the appellant has filed the company petition only on 17-3-2005, therefore, the parties would go back three years from the said date with reference to the date when the instalment was belatedly paid by BHEL. So far as acknowledgements pointed out by the appellant in the letters dated 17-4-2001 and 11-10-2002, are concerned, in our considered opinion, the same could not be interpreted and construed to be any acknowledgement in any manner. The aforesaid letters only indicate that what was communicated was only a statement that the claim of the appellant would be looked into. The Madras High Court under similar circumstances in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
