IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CAPP No.12 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.2.2011 S.G.N. Telecoms Ltd. -----Appellant. Vs. National Aluminium Co. Ltd. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ashok Gupta, Advocate & Mr. Adish Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Company Judge admitting the winding up petition, holding that the appellant was unable to pay its admitted debts. 2. Case of the respondent-original petitioner was that it was granted decree for recovery of Rs.16,52,957/- with interest @ Rs.20.25/% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till payment. The suit was filed in the year 1995. It appears that there is a mistake in noting this fact in the impugned order of learned Company Judge (to effect that interest was payable only after the date of decree till payment). Cause of action in the suit CAPP No.12 of 2010 was non-payment of price of goods supplied to the appellant. After statutory notice was served, the appellant Company failed to pay the amount. 3. The stand of the appellant was that the non-payment was for valid reasons. Though some material was received, the same was rejected. The company was in good financial health. The appellant, however, admitted its liability to the extent of Rs.4,47,586/-. 4. Learned Company Judge held that there was no valid reason for non-payment of amount covered by the decree and unsatisfied decree could be treated as debt. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. While issuing notice, a statement was made on behalf of the appellant that a sum of Rs.12 lacs will be deposited by the appellant to show its bonafides. Accordingly, it is stated that the said amount has been deposited. Learned counsel for the appellant also points out that apart from the above amount of Rs.12 lacs, about Rs.5 lacs had already been paid, which is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondent. Thus, if a sum of Rs.12 lacs already deposited by the appellant is paid to the respondent, it will get about Rs.17 lacs against the decree for about Rs.16.5 lacs. 7. Learned counsel for appellant has also offered to pay further sum of Rs.10 lacs towards full and final settlement of the dispute. It is pointed out that the rate of interest @ 20.25% per 2 CAPP No.12 of 2010 annum is exorbitant and if the rate of interest is reduced to 6%, the amount already paid and further to be paid should be treated as reasonable to settle the dispute. 8. We are of the view that the suggestion made on behalf of the appellant is fair. Learned counsel for the respondent has also fairly accepted the same. 9. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of with the following directions:- a) The appellant will pay further sum of Rs.10 lacs to the respondent within three months from today; b) The amount of Rs.12 lacs deposited in Court may be disbursed to the respondent; c) If the amount, as aforesaid, is not paid as above, the company petition will be revived and this appeal will stand dismissed; d) If the amount is paid as above, this appeal will stand allowed, the decree will stand satisfied and the company petition will stand dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE February 21, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) ashwani JUDGE 3