Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 400 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Restoration of supply of electricity disconnected - electricity to all the three units, which were disconnected owing to non-payment of dues during the ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’ - HELD THAT:- If any amount due for the period of the ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’ was not paid, in such case, Electricity Board should have moved before the Adjudicating Authority for payment of current dues of ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’, but it had no jurisdiction to disconnect the electricity in violation of Section 14(2) of the ‘I&B Code’ - The Electricity Board provides services by supplying electricity and thereby comes within the meaning of ‘Operational Creditor’ as defined under Section 5(20) read with Section 5(21) of the ‘I&B Code’. Similar matter fell for consideration before this Appellant Tribunal in “Uttrakhand Power Corporation Ltd. v. M/s. ANG Industries Ltd. [2018 (1) TMI 1445 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI] wherein this Appellate Tribunal taking into consideration the fact that the order of ‘Moratorium’ had been passed held that ‘Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited’ cannot recover any amount as was due for the earlier period prior to the date of initiation of ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’, though it was entitled to submit the claim before the ‘Resolution Professional’. This Appellate Tribunal further observed that the amount payable towards the current charges during the ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’ was payable to the ‘Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited’. Thus, it is not open to the Electricity Board to disconnect the electric supply of the ‘Corporate Debtor’ during the ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’, the ‘Resolution Professional’ should not have paid any dues of the earlier period for restoration of electricity. The ‘Resolution Professional’ should have brought the fact to the notice of the Adjudicating Authority, who should have ordered for restoration of electricity with clear direction to pay the dues of the current charges of the ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’. The ‘Resolution Plan’ having been approved by the Adjudicating Authority on 24th July, 2018 under Section 31, it was not open to the Adjudicating Authority to pass order subsequently on 25th February, 2019 to release the amount of ₹ 3.25 Crores in favour of Electricity Board Appeal allowed.
|