High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 08 CAL CK 0020

IVL Dhunseri Petrochem Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs Epitome Petrochemical Pvt. Ltd.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 11 August 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Moushumi Bhattacharya, J
CASE NUMBER
IA No. GA/3/2021 In CS No. 257/2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

24 paragraphs · 543 words

This is an application for summary judgment under Order XIII-A of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as amended by The Commercial Courts Act,

2015. The suit has been filed on account of price of goods sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. Learned counsel appearing for the

plaintiff/petitioner submits that by an order of a co-ordinate Bench dated 15th February, 2021, an application for judgment on admissions filed by the

petitioner was decreed in favour of the petitioner for a sum of Rs.67.44 lakhs. Counsel submits that the present application is for the balance sum of

approximately Rs.72.36 lakhs for the price of goods which the petitioner sold and supplied to the respondent. Counsel places a schedule of invoices for

the goods amounting to Rs.1.95 crores and five meetings held between the parties, the Minutes of which show unequivocal admission on the part of

the Chairman of the respondent of sums being due and owing to the petitioner. According to counsel, by a communication dated 27th July, 2019, the

respondent suddenly varied its stand in relation to the outstanding amount. Counsel submits that there is extreme urgency in the matter since the

respondent is now before the National Company Law Tribunal in respect of corporate insolvency proceedings initiated against the respondent.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner did not give monthly discount to the respondent as was agreed between the

parties. Counsel wishes to file an affidavit to bring such factual matters on record.

Upon hearing learned counsel, this Court is convinced that the respondent through the meetings held between the parties admitted to a sum of Rs.1.73

crores excluding interest which became Rs.1.42 crores on account of payments made by the respondent to the petitioner. After admitting to the

amount of Rs.1.42 crores, there appears to be no basis for the respondent to suddenly contradict the said amount and agree to Rs.67.44 lakhs. The

point of objection taken on behalf of the respondent with regard to the agreed rate of discount was considered by the co-ordinate bench but was

rejected and the suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner to the extent of Rs.67.44 lakhs. There are specific averments in the present application to

the effect that insolvency proceedings have commenced against the respondent. There is every likelihood, therefore, that the petitioner’s claim

may be frustrated if the Court does not intervene at the proper stage. It is also not disputed that the decreed amount of Rs.67.44 lakhs has not been

received by the petitioner although the said order has not been challenged by the respondent till date. It may also be mentioned that the respondent has

not filed its written statement despite the summons being served on 2nd January, 2020.

In view of the above, there shall be an order restraining the respondent from dealing with its assets or properties without first keeping aside a sum of

Rs.72.36 lakhs to the credit of the suit. The respondent shall be at liberty to bring other facts on record by an affidavit which shall be filed within two

weeks; reply within a week thereafter. The interim order shall remain in force for a period of six weeks from date.

List this matter after three weeks.