AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
27.02.2024: I.A. No. 1186 of 2024:- This is an application praying for condonation of delay. The grounds given for condonation of 11 days’ delay are mentioned in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the application, which are as follows:-
“2 The Appellant humbly submits that though the impugned order was pronounced on 12.12.2023, it was in fact uploaded onto the NCLT Portal, and therefore available to the Appellant in entirety, only on 02.01.2024. In the meantime, the Appellant had already applied for certified copy, since a free copy of the order had also not been made available to him. A certified true copy was provided on 03.01.2024. Thereafter, the Appellant couriered the same to the office of his counsel, but due to some miscommunication at the counsel's office, it was placed in the file titled "Devarajan Raman Vs Principal Commissioner and Others", being Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 977 of 2023, which is another appeal filed by the Appellant herein before this Hon'ble Tribunal, that is currently pending and next listed on 24.01.2024. It was only after the Appellant enquired regarding progress in mid-January, that the certified true order of the impugned order was located in the counsel's office, and the present appeal drawn out and filed.
3.In the circumstances listed out in the preceding para, the present appeal is being filed beyond a period of 30 days from the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 12 December, 2023. The Appellant humbly submits that in the circumstances explained above, he has made out sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the present appeal.”
We see sufficient cause to condone the delay. Delay of 11 days’ is condoned.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 350 of 2024:-
This Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 12.12.2023 by which IA No.1909 of 2023 filed by the Appellant has been rejected. In the IA, the Appellant has prayed following reliefs:-
“a. "To direct Respondent to restore the supply of electricity immediately.
b. To squash and set aside the claim of Rs.13,30,217/-from March 2021 to February 2023 and the subsequent bills raised, without power being made available, till the date the respondents restores power.
c. To direct the respondent to refund Rs.1,92,600/-being the amount paid by applicant for the period of disconnection from 05.10.2020 to 28.02.2021 during the CIRP period.
d. To direct the Respondents to refrain from initiating such as removing meter or r initiating any proceedings any coercive action.
e. The Respondents may be levied punishment as per the provisions of Section 74(2) as considered appropriate by the Hon'ble Tribunal.
f. Any other order as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit under the circumstances."
The Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order has observed that the Appellant may pursue their remedy before the Appellate Authority of the Department. The issues raised by the Appellant are with regard to issue of billing during the CIRP period, refund of the amount and reduction of the load and not to charge the bill when the electricity was disconnected.
We are of the view that for all said issues the Adjudicating Authority has rightly relegated to the Appellant to seek remedy before the Appellate Authority of the Department. It is open for the Appellant to file appropriate appeal/representation with regard to grievance raised before the appropriate Authority and it is for the said Authority to consider and take appropriate decision.
With these observations, we dispose of the Appeal.