- (1.) LEAVE granted. In a winding-up proceeding, it was alleged that the respondent Company was required to pay an amount of Rs. 3,17,352.00 to the appellant. It appears that on being provisionally appointed the Official Liquidator went to the premises of the respondent Company to take possession thereof. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application before the Company Judge for recalling the order of appointment of the Official Liquidator on the ground that the respondent Company had already paid the principal amount and that only the question of interest remains to be decided.
(2.) THE matter was heard by the Company Judge, who also recorded the said fact and having regard to the provisions of the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993, directed the respondent to pay to the appellant interest on the principal amount @ 9% per annum, with liberty to the appellant herein, to move the Civil Court in order to establish its claim under the provisions of the aforesaid Act An appeal was preferred by the respondent herein before the Division Bench, which modified the order of the learned Company Judge by withdrawing the leave granted to the appellant to move the Civil Court for claiming higher interest. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, we are of the view that the Division Bench committed an error in withdrawing the liberty which had been granted by the learned Company Judge, to approach the civil court, having particular regard to the provisions of S. 4 of the aforesaid Act of 1993.
(3.) WE , therefore, allow the appeal and modify the order of the Division Bench of the High Court impugned herein by restoring the liberty which had been granted by the learned Company Judge to the appellant to move the civil court for higher interest. The appellant will be at liberty to move the civil court in terms of the liberty granted by the Company Judge.;