AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
10.03.2025: This appeal is against an impugned order dated 18.10.2022. It is the submission of Learned Counsel for the Appellant on 03.02.2020 an order was passed in IA No. 31/2020 as follows:
“3.In the meanwhile, the respondents are directed to restore the power supply of the Corporate Debtor and to continue the same as it was being supplied before disconnection, until further orders.”
It is the submission of Learned Counsel for the Appellant yet again IA No. 31/2020 was taken up wherein earlier order dated 03.02.2020 was modified to the following extent:
“We have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record available. In view of our decision in IA No. 427/2021, the order dated 03.02.2020 of this Adjudicating Authority stands modified accordingly and the instant application i.e. IA No. 31/2020 is dismissed and disposed of.”
The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has also referred to the order passed in IA No. 427/2021 as follows:
“5)As observed in our order for lA No 413/2021 and 412/2020, this Bench refrains from adjudicating on the impugned contract of the corporate debtor with the PSPCL for reasons recorded therein. However, we consider it a part of our duty to ensure that the corporate debtor continues its business operations smoothly during the moratorium period. To meet the business requirements of the corporate debtor, we grant a further extension till the decision on approval of Resolution Plan application on the condition that the corporate debtor applies for regular connection under PSERC Regulations, 2OO7 immediately after the decision on the resolution plan pending before this Adjudicating Authority.”
During the course of arguments, it is submitted by Learned Counsel for the Appellant he shall be satisfied if a direction is made that at the time of applying for regular connection under PSERC Regulations, 2007, the pre-CIRP electricity dues be not asked to be paid for by the Appellant.
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent is also present and submits the pre-CIRP electricity dues are not been demanded by the Respondent No. 1 and in fact till date the Appellant had not applied for regular connection under PSERC Regulations, 2007. Heard.
We direct in case the Appellant applies under PSERC Regulations, 2007 for a regular connection, the pre-CIRP electricity dues be not demanded from the Appellant and in fact this has been held in Twentyone Sugars Limited v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 487 of 2023 as well as Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. v. Akums Lifesciences Ltd. in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1258 of 2023.
The Appellant, however, shall comply with all the procedures and regulations as are required to obtain the regular connection.
It is made clear the order passed herein would not come in the way of pending writ petition filed before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging Power Purchase Agreement in CWP No. 741/2023.
With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of. All pending applications are also disposed of.