TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt of Law . HELD THAT:- The Learned Counsel refers to the Order dated 18.01.2022 of the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the matter of M/S TEESTAVALLEY POWER TRANSMISSION LTD. VERSUS M/S ABIR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL [ 2022 (1) TMI 1391 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI.] wherein at paragraphs 3 and 4 it is observed if the arbitration proceedings result in any award in favour of the Appellant , it shall be open to the Appellant to take such remedy as permissible under the law and impugned order shall not be come in his way in execution of the Arbitral Award. On going through the Impugned Order dated 25.05.2023 in IA/239/2022 in CP(IB) No.154/BB/2017 passed by the Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay in preferring the instant Appeal as projected by the Petitioner / Appellant in IA/846/2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.274 of 2023 is that the Petitioner / Appellant Learned Counsel was suffering from high fever from 22.06.2023 to 29.06.2023 and further that the Tribunal was closed due to Summer Holidays till 02.07.2023. 3) Further, it is represented on behalf of the Petitioner / Appellant that the instant Appeal was inadvertently preferred before the Principal Bench, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi on 03.07.2023 but in reality, the instant Appeal is to be preferred only before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench. 4) In this process, there has occasioned a delay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited ( TUL ), a Govt. of Sikkim Enterprise, having 69.08% stake and M/s. Powergrid Corporation of India Limited ( PGCIL ), a Govt. of India Enterprise having 30.92% stake in the Appellant Company . 4) According to the Appellant , it had implemented 215 KM 400 kV D/C transmission line form Teesta III HEP, Sikkim to District Kishanganj, Bihar ( Project ); as a part of Master Plan for evacuation of power of Hydro Electric Project in the State. 5) It comes to be known that the Contracts , for construction of Project was awarded to the Consortium of M/s. Deepak Cable (India) Limited ( Corporate Debtor or DCIL ) and M/s. Abir Infrastructure Private Limited ( Consortium or DCIL-APIL JV ) in two separate packages viz. Tower Package ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... connection, the Learned Counsel for the Appellant points out that the issue of Termination of Contract was dealt with by the Hon ble Single Bench and Division Bench of Hon ble High Court of Delhi in its order dated 03.09.2014 in Petition No. OMP No.557 of 2014 I.A. No. 10888 of 2014 and Judgment dated 15.09.2014 passed in Appeal No. FAO (OS) No. 397 of 2014 and 398 of 2014 respectively it is observed as under:- Para 145. The legal position which can be summarized .. The dispute between the parties to the underlying contract has to be decided at the civil forum i.e. a civil suit if there exists no arbitration clause in the Contract or before the Arbitral Tribunal if there exists an Arbitration Clause in the Contract 10) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inguish claims or disputes between the parties which are pending adjudication before the Arbitration Tribunal or a Court of Law . 13) The other contention put forth on the side of the Appellant is that the Adjudicating Authority / Tribunal had failed to appreciate that the Arbitral Proceedings between the Corporate Debtor and the Appellant were pending from the year 2014. Insolvency Proceedings came to be initiated in the year 2018 and in fact, the claims should have been made part of the Liquidation Proceedings of the Corporate Debtor . 14) The Learned Counsel for the Appellant brings it to the notice of this Tribunal that the Adjudicating Authority / Tribunal had failed to appreciate that the Learned Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /239/2022 in CP(IB) No.154/BB/2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority / Tribunal is of the considered view that the Adjudicating Authority / Tribunal based on the facts and circumstances of the instant case and also keeping in mind of the Order in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.28 of 2022 to the effect that if the Arbitration Proceedings result in any award in favour of the Appellant , it shall be open to the Appellant to take such remedy, as permissible under the law and the Impugned Order shall not come in his way in execution of the Arbitral Award came to the conclusion that the Liquidator had correctly rejected the Appellant / Applicant s claim by means of the reasons given in the letter dated 29.01.2022, considering t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
