Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2019 (1) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 927 - Tri - Companies LawProposal for rehabilitation - company was declared as a sick industrial company - application before BIFR - BIFR sanction scheme - applicant-company claimed recovery from the respondent-Board - Held that:- Scheme under implementation under sub-section (12) of section 18 of the Sick Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 shall be deemed to be approved plan under subsection (1) of section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the same has to be implemented as per the provisions of Part II of the Code. There is no dispute to the fact that order of the BIFR sanctioning the scheme is not appealed against by the respondent herein or by any other stakeholders. At page 122 of paper book, the company had produced copy of application filed by them before the BIFR. The BIFR's order is produced at page 128. It is "The company is discharged from perview of the SICA/BIFR (iii) All creditors, statutory authorities are at liberty to recover their dues, if any, according to sanctioned scheme (v) Unimplemented portion of the sanctioned scheme would be implemented by all concerned " There is no challenge to the above order passed by the BIFR. It is not in dispute that as per the sanctioned scheme the Jharkhand State Electricity Board directed to waive penal interest, compound interest, simple interest and liquidated charges. The respondent-Board is bound by the above order. Now, they cannot claim recovery of sum of ₹ 14,12,000 (rupees fourteen lakhs twelve thousand only) from the applicant-company. Hence, all order passed by the respondent-Board or its competent officer on June 22, 2017 are held to be not tenable under the law. They have to be set aside. Oder:- It is declared that the respondent-Board (Jharkhand State Electricity Board) is bound by sanction scheme dated May 25, 2012 and cannot claim recovery of any amount from the applicant-company as per order dated June 22, 2017 passed by its certificate officer. The applicant-company's claim of recovery of ₹ 5,00,000 (rupees five lakhs only) from the respondent-Board stands rejected.
|