9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rakesh Kumar Jain : ( Oral ) This appeal is directed against the order dated 24.03.2023 passed in CP (IB) No. 1193/MB-IV/2020 by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench - IV, Mumbai) on an application filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (In short 'Code') by Respondent No. 1 for the resolution of an amount of Rs. 1,03,37,635/- which included interest @ 24 % p.a. on the principal amount of Rs. 84,19,041/- from the date of default that is 21.09.2019 of each invoice has been admitted, moratorium was imposed and Kanhaiya Maheshwari was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). 2. At the time of preliminary hearing on 20.04.2023, the following order was passed:- "20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of suit till realization. 5. Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that in the said suit, the defendant while appearing as a witness, stated in examination chief that:- "12. I say that after filing of the suit, the defendant made part payment of Rs. 34,00,000/- and after giving credit to the said payment, an amount of Rs. 61,18,217/- which includes principal amount of Rs. 23,70,417/- and interest Rs. 37,37,710/- 18% p.a is due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. I tender herewith Ledger account of the defendant maintained by the Plaintiff in their books of account as Exhibit-18. The said ledger account is signed by me during the course of business." 6. He has thus submitted that since Respondent No. 1 has claimed interes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- was remaining which includes principal amount of Rs. 23,70,417/- and interest of Rs. 37,37,710/- @18% p.a. Since, Respondent No. 1 itself has claimed the interest @ 18% which too has been granted by the Hon'ble High Court in its judgment decree dated 14.12.2022, therefore, it does not lie in his mouth to claim interest @ 24% on the balance amount. 12. In view thereof, we accept the contention of the Appellant and the calculation submitted by him by way of a chart which we have already referred to above that the remaining amount to be claimed by Respondent No. 1 is less than Rs. 1 Cr. which does not meet the criteria of the threshold, therefore, the application filed under Section 9 of the Code is not maintainable. The appeal is thus all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
