9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the Appellant for supply of conductors/finished products on 25.05.1998 and the goods were supplied. The entire amount of invoice has been paid with delay but without interest as was required to be paid under Sections 3 to 5 of "Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993" (Interest Act - in short). According to the Appellant, it had filed claim with Arbitral Tribunal (Haryana Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council) claiming Rs. 40,25,648/- upto 30.06.2001 for bills mentioned at Serial Nos.1 to 45. Subsequently, updated claim was filed to claim Rs. 1,36,00,184/- upto 31.01.2008 on account of interest. The Arbitral Tribunal allowed the claim of the Appellant on 21.06.2010 with regard to bills mentioned at Serial Nos.26 to 45 to actual date of payment with monthly compounding as per the provisions of the Interest Act. The Respondent filed Objection Petition on 19.10.2010 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act - in short) read with Section 19 of The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (Act of 2006 - in short) to set aside the Award. The Objection Petition AC 580 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent challenged Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Respondent had filed original Petition under the Arbitration Act OP 523 of 2010 before Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Respondent also deposited 75% of the Award amount as per Section 19 of "Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006". This Act repealed the Interest Act with effect from 02.10.2006. The Respondent has referred also to proceedings filed by the Appellant with regard to its rejected claim regarding invoices at Serial Nos.1 to 25. In the present matter, we are not concerned with litigation with regard to those invoices at Serial Nos.1 to 25. 5. It is stated for the Respondent that the OP filed by the Respondent was transferred to District Judge, Chandigarh and renumbered as Arbitration Case No.580 of 2010. The District Court, Chandigarh dismissed the Arbitration Case No.580 of 2010 in August, 2014 on the ground that the Respondent had failed to deposit full amount towards 75% of the Award. (This way required to be determined in view of Section 7 of the Interest Act to entertain the Appeal.) Being aggrieved, Respondent filed Appeals before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. The Respondent has submitted that subsequently Execution Petition of the Appellant 33 of 2016 was transferred to Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and renumbered as CEP 41 of 2017 and the Executing Court considered the Orders of District Court, Chandigarh which ascertained the amount towards 75% of the Award and considering the fact that Respondent deposited 75% Award, was pleased to dismiss the CEP by Order dated 20.11.2017. 8. The Respondent is pointing out that the Appellant again filed CEP 15/2018 relating to invoices 26 to 45 before the Commercial Court-cum-XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad which was closed by Orders dated 27.08.2018 by the Executing Court. According to the Respondent, when such CEP was pending before City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the present proceedings came to be filed which according to the Respondent has been rightly dismissed by NCLT by Impugned Order. The Respondent has also referred to the Appellant approaching Haryana Facilitation Council and the Counsel holding on 06.09.2017 that the application filed by the Appellant was not maintainable and has pointed out further developments of the Appellant moving anot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such aspects. It will be open to the petitioner to move such application and the Executing Court can deal with the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the Misc. Applications stand disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of." Referring to the above Order, the argument is that since much before the Notice under Section 8 was given in the present matter, there were disputes regarding the amount of interest payable and its calculation and when that dispute spiralled up to Hon'ble Supreme Court, the above Order came to be passed. Referring to the above Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is argued by the learned Counsel for the Respondent that the dispute regarding adjustment calculation of dues has been left open to the Respondent to raise the same before the Executing Court. The Respondent claims that in the present matter, there has been lot of litigation and after the above Order dated 30th July, 2018 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed that the payments made shall be adjusted by the EP Court and as per provisions of CPC, whether award is satisfied is to be decided by the Executing Court. Accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
