IDBI Bank Limited. vs M/s Tel Private Limited

This application is necessitated in view of the order of the DRT dated 04.07.2017 directing the appellant to obtain leave of this Court for release

of the amounts lying with the DRT. The learned Company Judge by an order dated 20.10.2015 admitted the winding up petition and directed the

Department of Telecommunication to deposit any amounts due to the company with the Official Liquidator.

An interim order dated 07.12.2015 was passed by a Division Bench of this Court to which one of us (S.J.Vazifdar, C.J.) was a party, which

reads as under:-

Issue notice of motion returnable on 28.01.2016. The learned Judge has directed an amount of Rs. 35,33,38,634/- to be deposited

with the official liquidator. It is possible that the learned Judge''s attention was not invited to the fact that the order of the DRT also

directed defendant No. 1 i.e. the company in liquidation to instruct the DoT/any other party/entity to deposit any money due to it in

respect of refund/transfer of 3G spectrum charges/fees ""directly to this Tribunal"" i.e. the DRT until further orders. That possibly is why

the impugned order directs the amount to be deposited with the official liquidator.

In any event, we intend passing an interim order which would protect all the parties concerned.

In these circumstances, the said amount shall be deposited with the DRT as directed by the order of the DRT dated 16.06.2015. The

DRT shall invest the same in a fixed deposit of a nationalized bank initially for a period of one year and thereafter for like periods of

one year each till further orders.

Needless to add that this order will be subject to further orders in the appeal.

The appeal was ultimately disposed of by an order dated 28.01.2016 which reads as under:-

It is sufficient, at this stage, to dispose of the appeal in terms of the order dated 07.12.2015.

In other words, the amounts if and when paid by the Department of Telecommunications, shall be deposited in the DRT, Delhi. The

DRT shall invest the same in a fixed deposit of a nationalized bank initially for a period of one year and thereafter for like periods of

one year each, subject to orders passed by the DRT. Learned counsel for the appellant states that official liquidator has already been

impleaded. Learned counsel for the appellant further agrees and undertakes that the appellant shall give notice of every application in

those proceedings to the official liquidator. The official liquidator upon receipt of the notice shall seek directions from the learned

Company Judge regarding appearing in those proceedings.

By an order dated 24.03.2017 we clarified our order dated 28.01.2016. The order dated 24.03.2017 reads as under:-

The Department of Telecommunication (DoT) has not stated in writing that it will deposit only an amount of Rs.35,33,38,634/- with

the DRT in view of the orders dated 07.12.2015 and 28.01.2016 passed by this Court in this appeal. The learned counsel, however,

state that this is how the DoT appears to be interpreting these orders. If that is so, the interpretation is wrong for the orders of the

Court do not require the DoT to deposit only an amount of Rs.35,33,38,634/-. They require the DoT to deposit with the DRT any

amount which the DoT considers as due and payable to the company in liquidation towards refund of spectrum fee. In other words, if

according to the DoT, any other amount less or more than Rs.35,33,38,634/- is payable, that is the amount that the DoT should

deposit in the DRT. If, according to DoT, the amounts are payable, then the DoT must do so latest by 31.03.2017. This is without

prejudice to the rights of the parties to claim interest from the DoT in respect thereof as well.

The application is accordingly disposed of.

In the result, therefore, the amounts are now lying with the DRT. The appellant filed an application for disbursement of the amount of about `

176.53 crores to itself and to the members of the consortium to the extent of their claims. It is in that application that the DRT directed the

appellant to obtain leave of this Court for release of the amount.

We clarify that it is not necessary for the parties to obtain leave of this Court for disbursement of that amount. The amounts stand deposited with

the DRT. It is for the DRT to consider the manner in which the amounts should be dealt with after giving notice to all the parties concerned

including the Official Liquidator. Even the conditions upon which the interim disbursement, if any, are to be made must be imposed by the DRT.

The application is accordingly disposed of.