M/S Yarn Sales Corporation Through Sh. ... vs Power State Power Corporation Limited & ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A purchaser of a corporate debtor's assets in liquidation, sold on an "as is where is" basis, cannot be made to pay the pre-liquidation electricity arrears of the corporate debtor as a condition for obtaining a fresh electricity connection, because the clean slate principle under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 displaces the statutory recovery of such dues, and the Code's overriding effect under Section 238 prevails over the Electricity Act, 2003. Where the corporate debtor's dues were already claimed and dealt with in the liquidation process, those dues stand extinguished under the liquidation proceedings and the distribution licensee cannot insist on their payment from the auction purchaser; the successful purchaser is liable only for statutory charges for a fresh connection other than the corporate debtor's outstanding arrears. A sale condition stating that all past and future liabilities, including electricity dues, are to be borne by the successful bidder does not override the Code's statutory scheme, so such a clause cannot justify fastening pre-liquidation arrears on the purchaser.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents Present: For Appellants : Ms. Prachi Johri, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Mr. Prashant Kapila, Adv. for R1 Mr. Karanveer Jindal, Mr. Gautam Singh, Adv. for R2
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain:
This appeal is directed against the order dated 01.12.2023
passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law
Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench) by which application bearing I.A.
No. 962 of 2022 filed in CP (IB) No. 160/Chd/Pb/2018 by the
Appellant under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Code, 2016 (in short 'Code') has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts of this case are that Gian Chand & Sons Pvt.
Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) was admitted to liquidation on
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 2
05.08.2019 and Respondent No. 2 was appointed as the
Liquidator.
3. Respondent No. 2 invited claims pending against the
Corporate Debtor. Respondent No. 1 submitted its claim of Rs.
34,59,859/-, outstanding electricity dues relating to account no.
3002810493 for its building property located at Bajra Road
Village Bajra, Rahon Road, Ludhiana.
4. Respondent No. 2 admitted the claim of Rs. 34,59,859/-.
Respondent No. 2 made public announcement for sale of assets
of the Corporate Debtor by way of auction on 03.02.2022 and
auction took place on 18.02.2022 through the e-auction platform
of M/s C1 India Pvt. Ltd. The Appellant was the highest bidder
for the Land measuring 5747.50 sq. yards at Bajra Road Village
Bajra Rahon Road, Ludhiana alongwith building. Accordingly, the
said property was sold to the Appellant and on payment of the
entire sale consideration of Rs. 4,30,00,000/-, the sale certificate
was issued by Respondent No. 2 to the Appellant on 22.03.2022.
The property in question had an electricity connection bearing
Account No. 3002810493 with Respondent No. 1 which was
disconnected due to the non-payment of electricity dues.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 3
5. The Appellant after purchasing the property, made a
representation to Respondent No. 1 on 02.04.2022 for releasing
the electricity connection and requested Respondent No. 1 to
settle all its pending dues with Respondent No. 2. The Appellant
sent an application dated 12.05.2022 for release of fresh
electricity connection of 99KW in its name. Respondent No. 1 vide
its letter dated 20.05.2022 informed the Appellant that their
outstanding dues towards the connection installed at said
premises are Rs. 70,17,865/-which has to be cleared before
the new connection is given. The Appellant is stated to have
replied to the letter dated 20.05.2022 on 20.06.2022 but there
was no response.
6. The Appellant filed I.A. No. 962 of 2022 before the
Adjudicating Authority for the issuance of necessary direction for
the release of new electricity connection in its name and setting
aside the outstanding raised by Respondent No. 1 through letter
dated 22.05.2022, pending towards Corporate Debtor against its
electricity connection at the premises situated on Khata No.
210/215, bearing Khasra No. 51/11/2-12-13 in Hadbast No. 76
situated in village Bazra Tehsil East Ludhiana, Punjab.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 4
7. In this application, Respondent No. 1 filed reply dated
01.02.2023 in which it was stated that the sale conducted by
Respondent No. 2 was a simple stand alone asset sale and not a
sale of the CD as a going concern. It was also stated that as per
the sale certificate, the liquidator is not responsible for any
shortfall or defect or shortcoming in the said land or title of the
said land and that all past, present and future statutory and
other liabilities whether due or overdue by whatever name being
called including electricity dues are to borne by the successful
bidder. It was also stated that the sale of the land was on 'as is
where is basis, as is what is basis, whatever there is basis, no
recourse basis'.
8. Respondent No. 2 alleged before the Adjudicating Authority
that dues of Respondent No. 1, during the CIRP period have been
paid in full and there is a recoverable of Rs. 4,51,293/- by
Respondent No. 2 from Respondent No. 1 for which a separate
application has already been filed by him bearing I.A No. 1505 of
2022.
9. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application while
referring to the provisions in the sale certificate dated
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 5
22.03.2022. The relevant extract of the same is reproduced also
for a ready reference:-
"WHEREAS the said Land of Lot No. 1 of GCSPL has been sold on "As is where is basis" "As is what is basis".
"Whatever there is basis" "No recourse basis in which Liquidator is not responsible for any shortfall or defect or shortcoming in the said Land or title of the said land and that all past, present or future statutory or other liabilities, whether due or overdue, by whatever name being called, including but not limited to taxes / demands/ claims/ maintenance fee / electricity dues / water charges / local authority dues / State Government dues / dues of any agency of State or District, etc., outstanding as on date or yet to fall due in respect of the said land should be ascertained and borne by the successful bidder".
10. It has been held that the since the assets have been taken
over "as is where is basis, as is what is basis, whatever there is
basis, no recourse basis". Therefore, liabilities towards
outstanding electricity dues having been waived because of
liquidation is not tenable under the law.
11. While assailing the impugned order, Counsel for the
Appellant has submitted that pre-CIRP dues cannot be fastened
upon the auction purchaser. It is submitted that the concept of
clean slate purchase is recognized in the Code. The Appellant
only purchased part of the property/assets of the CD and not the
company and thus the liabilities of the company do not become
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 6
liabilities of the auction purchaser. It is further submitted that
Respondent No. 1 had participated in the Insolvency process
while submitting its claim in the liquidation process and cannot
make recoveries from the auction purchaser de hors the
mechanism provided under the Code. In support of her
submissions, she has relied upon a decision of this Court
rendered in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1355 of 2022 titled as 'Chinar Steel
Segments Centre Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Samir Kumar Agarwal'. It is
submitted that once a claim is dealt with under liquidation
process, such claim gets extinguished and the creditor cannot be
allowed to renew the claim and insist for payment of entire dues. It is submitted that in the case of Chinar Steel Segments Centre
Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) it has been held that the arrears of the
electricity dues cannot be insisted upon for issuing a new
connection. She has further submitted that even if the e-auction
notice/sale certificate provides that dues are to be paid by the
auction purchaser, the same cannot override the applicable law.
In this regard, she has relied upon a decision of this Court
rendered in the case of Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
Vs. HSA Traders through Sole Proprietor & Ors., CA (AT) (Ins) No.
527 of 2023. She has further submitted that in the case of
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 7
Paschimanchal (Supra) it has been held that Section 238 of the
Code overrides the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 despite
the latter containing two specific provisions which open with non-
obstante clauses (Section 173 and 174).
12. On the other hand, Counsel for Respondent No. 1 has
submitted that the distribution licensee has a right to recover
electricity dues from the auction purchaser under the provisions
of the Electricity Act, 2003 and has relied upon a decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C Ninan Vs. Kerala State
Electricity Board & Ors. 2023 (3) RCR (Civil) 227. He has further
submitted that there was outstanding dues of the CD in
liquidation and since the property has been sold on "as is where
is basis, as is what is basis, whatever there is basis, no recourse
basis" and the certificate of sale dated 22.03.2022 categorically
provided that all past, present and future property liabilities
including electricity dues outstanding as on date shall be borne
by the successful bidder, the impugned order does not suffer
from any error in which it has been held that the liabilities to
pay of the outstanding electricity dues is of the Appellant being
the successful bidder. He has also submitted that the judgment
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 8
in the case of K.C. (Supra) has not been considered in the case of
Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (Supra).
13. In rebuttal, Counsel for the Appellant has argued that the
only judgment relied upon by Respondent is in the case of K.C.
(Supra) which was in respect of a sale under the SARFESAI Act in
which it has been held that the Electricity Act would apply
whereas it has been held by this Court that the provisions of the
Code override the Electricity Act, therefore, it is of no help to
Respondent No. 1.
14. We have heard Counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
15. The point involved is short and simple as to whether the
Appellant being the purchaser of the asset, in liquidation, is
liable to pay past dues of the electricity of the CD, for the purpose
of obtaining a new electricity connection on payment of statutory
dues except for the past dues?
16. The aforesaid question has been duly answered by this
Court in the case of Chinar Steel Segments Centre Pvt. Ltd.
(Supra) in which the following observations have been made:-
"37. The issues raised in the present Appeal are fully covered in favour of the Appellant by a recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 11.09.2023 in Civil Appeal No.5556 of 2023- "Tata Power Western Odisha
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 9
Distribution Limited (TPWODL) & Anr. vs. Jagannath Sponge Private Limited". Appellant in the above case was also insisting for payment of arrears of electricity dues. The Hon'ble Supreme Court relied on the earlier judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Raman Ispat Private Limited & Ors.- 2023 SCC Online SC 842"
and has also noted the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Embassy Property Developments Pvt. Ltd." and distinguished the same. It is useful to extract the entire judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 11.09.2023, which is to the following effect:-
"In our opinion, the legal issue is covered by the judgment of this Court in "Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Raman Ispat Private Limited and Others"1 and the order of this Court in "Southern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. Gavi Siddeswara Steels (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Another."2 The appellant - Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited cannot insist on payment of arrears, which have to be paid in terms of the waterfall mechanism, for grant of an electricity connection. However, the successful resolution applicant will have to comply with the other requirements for grant of electricity connection. The clean slate principle would stand negated if the successful resolution applicant is asked to pay the arrears payable by the corporate debtor for the grant of an electricity connection in her/his name.
In "Embassy Property Developments Private Limited vs. State of Karnataka and Others"3, this Court clarified that a decision by public authority etc. may fall within the jurisdiction of the tribunals constituted under the Code, where the issue relates to or arises out of the dues payable to an operational or financial creditor, by observing:
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 10
"37...It will be a different matter, if proceedings under statutes like Income Tax Act had attained finality, fastening a liability upon the corporate debtor, since, in such cases, the dues payable to the Government would come within the meaning of the expression "operational debt" under Section 5(21), making the Government an "operational creditor" in terms of Section 5(2). The moment the dues to the Government are crystallised and what remains is only payment, the claim of the Government will have to be adjudicated and paid only in a manner prescribed in the resolution plan as approved by the adjudicating authority, namely, the NCLT."
The above-quoted observations from Embassy Property Developments Private Limited (supra) would confer jurisdiction on the tribunal constituted under the Code insofar as the appellant - Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited is insisting on payment of the dues of the corporate debtor for restoration/grant of the electricity connection. The dues of the corporate debtor have to be paid in the manner prescribed in the resolution plan, as approved by the adjudicating authority. The resolution plan is approved when it is in accord with the provision of the Code. Thus, the issue of corporate debtor's dues falls within the fold of the phrase 'arising out of or in relation to insolvency resolution' under section 60(5)(c) of the Code. Therefore, we do not find any good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s)/order(s) and hence, the present appeals are dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
38. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Tata Power Western Odisha Distribution Limited" (supra), submission advanced on behalf of the Respondent- Damodar Valley Corporation cannot be accepted. The Respondent cannot insist that unless the arrears of the electricity dues which dues
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 11
were payable by the Corporate Debtor prior to disconnection are paid by the Appellant only then communication can be issued. The stand taken by the Respondent is contrary to the law laid down by this Tribunal as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court as noted above.
39. In view of the foregoing discussions, we are satisfied that the Adjudicating Authority committed error in rejecting IA No. 984 of 2021 as not maintainable. We hold that the application is fully maintainable under Section 60(5) for the reasons as indicated above. The Appellant has made out a case for grant of reliefs as claimed in the application. In result, we allow the Appeal in following manner:-
The impugned order dated 01.09.2022 is set aside. IA No.984 of 2021 is allowed. Respondent No.1 to grant fresh connection of electricity after taking all necessary charges for fresh connection except outstanding dues of the Corporate Debtor which stood satisfied and extinguished as per the liquidation proceedings against the Corporate Debtor"
17. Similarly, in the case of Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitram
Nigam Ltd. (Supra), this Court has reiterated its view that the
past dues cannot be claimed for the purpose of grant of new
electricity connection. In this regard, the following observations
have been made which read as under:-
"17. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Tata Power" (Supra) clearly held that Tata Power cannot insist on payment of arrears for granting electricity connection. This Tribunal in "Chinar Steel Segments Centre Pvt. Ltd." after noticing the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal has ultimately allowed the appeal and
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 12
issued directions in Para 39 of the judgment, which are to the following effect:
"39. In view of the foregoing discussions, we are satisfied that the Adjudicating Authority committed error in rejecting IA No. 984 of 2021 as not maintainable. We hold that the application is fully maintainable under Section 60(5) for the reasons as indicated above. The Appellant has made out a case for grant of reliefs as claimed in the application. In result, we allow the Appeal in following manner:- The impugned order dated 01.09.2022 is set aside. IA No.984 of 2021 is allowed. Respondent No.1 to grant fresh connection of electricity after taking all necessary charges for fresh connection except outstanding dues of the Corporate Debtor which stood satisfied and extinguished as per the liquidation proceedings against the Corporate Debtor".
18. We, thus, are of the view that submission raised by learned counsel for the Appellant that Successful Auction Purchaser was liable to pay the arrears of electricity dues which were dues of the erstwhile Corporate Debtor and without payment of said dues electricity connection cannot be granted are not in accord with the statutory scheme of IBC. The Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in issuing direction in Para 16 of the impugned order, as extracted above, to energise the electricity connection without insisting on the payment of pre-CIRP dues. It is made clear that the Successful Auction Purchaser shall be liable to pay all dues for getting the new connection except the arrears of the electricity dues of Rs.39,15,625/- as was being claimed by the Appellant."
18. It is pertinent to mention that this Court in the case of
Paschimanchal (Supra) has also made a reference to the same
clause of due diligence which is there in the sale certificate
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 13
issued to the Appellant because in that also the property was
sold on 'as is where is, as is what is, whatever there is and
without recourse basis' and framed the question that "electricity
dues of the CD who underwent insolvency resolution
process/liquidation process can still be insisted against the
Successful Resolution Applicant/Successful Auction Purchaser
is not res integra?". The decision in the case of Telangana State
Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. & Anr. Vs.
Srigdhaa Beverages, (2020) 6 SCC 404, has also been
distinguished in this case and also observed that:-
"15. In the case of "Chinar Steel Segments Centre Pvt. Ltd. vs. Samir Kumar Agarwal" (Supra), this Tribunal has noticed the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. & Anr. vs. Srigdhaa Beverages" as well as "Eastern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. Maithan Alloys Limited & Ors.- Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.961 of 2021" of this Tribunal which judgment has also been relied by the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order. The Judgment of this Tribunal in "Shiv Shakti Inter Globe Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. KTC Foods Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 650 of 2020" decided on 25.02.2022 also support the submission made by learned counsel for the Respondent. This Tribunal took view that when the Corporate Debtor is sold in the liquidation proceeding, Corporate Debtor cannot be burdened by any past or remaining unpaid outstanding liabilities."
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024 14
19. The Judgment relied upon by Respondent in the case of
K.C. (Supra) is not applicable because it has not dealt with
Section 238 of the Code which has the overriding effect.
20. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the
considered opinion that there is a patent error in the approach of
the Adjudicating Authority in dismissing the application of the
Appellant, therefore, the present appeal succeeds and the
impugned order is hereby set aside though without any order as
to costs.
[Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)
[Mr. Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical)
New Delhi
02nd July, 2024
Sheetal
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 292 of 2024
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free