9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash Kothari and Ms Revati Desai i/b Little and Co. for petitioner. Mr. Ashish Kamat a/w Mr. Ameya Gokhale, Ms Salonee Kulkarni and Ms Kriti Kalyani i/b Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. for Respondent no.3. Mr. Pradeep Sancheti , Sr. Adv. a/w Mr. Pulkit Sharma and Mr. Shriraj Khambete i/b Saraf & Partners for CoC. P.C.: 1. We have spent enough time in hearing this matter and trying to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (CIRP). 2. Mr.Kamat appearing for respondent no.3 submitted (without prejudice to rights and contentions) that for the period prior to CIRP, 'MSEDCL' is treated as an operational creditor and the period after beginning of CIRP, 'MSEDCL' is being paid about Rs. 25 lakhs per month to keep power supply going on to Lavasa. Mr. Andhyarujina submitted that it is only part payment. Mr. Kamat stated that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 'MSEDCL' for a period prior to CIRP is being treated as an operational creditor and it is COC who will decide how much 'MSEDCL' should be paid from the amount recovered from sale of Lavasa Corporation. Therefore, it is COC represented by Mr. Sancheti who will be getting most of the money and COC expects 'MSEDCL' to supply electricity to Lavasa Corporation on credit using public funds, so that CO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the consumers, who are the general public of Maharashtra State. 6. Mr. Sancheti states that during a meeting held on 22.4.2022, COC has decided not to pay anything more to 'MSEDCL' but at the same time, Mr. Sancheti assures this Court that he will try his best to make an effort to speak to members of the COC and find out if they would be willing to change or alter the decision that they have tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
