Shakti International LLP Vs Steel Exchange India Pvt Ltd (NCLT Hyderabad)
The NCLT Hyderabad considered a petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor for non-payment of ₹162.57 crore, primarily claimed as “delayed charges” or “extension charges” arising from contractual arrangements. The parties had entered into a Master Supply Agreement dated 29.09.2016, followed by supplementary agreements, governing the supply of steel rebars. While the underlying supply transactions and principal dues were largely admitted, the dispute centered on the legality, enforceability, and characterization of the delayed charges.
The Operational Creditor contended that such charges were contractually stipulated under Annexure A of the agreement and continued under subsequent agreements. It relied on nomination letters and calculation sheets to assert that the Corporate Debtor remained liable, especially where nominee entities failed to pay. A demand notice under Section 8 quantified the delayed charges, while the Corporate Debtor disputed only these charges and not the supply transactions.
The Corporate Debtor challenged the maintainability of the petition, arguing that delayed charges did not constitute “operational debt” under the Code. It further contended that the claim was unascertained, unsupported by invoices or ledger entries, and based solely on a unilateral calculation sheet. It pointed out that prior reconciliations and payments did not reflect any delayed charges, and that such charges had been disputed earlier by nominee entities. The Corporate Debtor also raised a plea of waiver and argued that the matter involved pre-existing disputes requiring adjudication outside insolvency proceedings.
