LexM/S SHANTI CONDUCTORS (P) LTD. ANR. versus ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H [2016) 6 S.C.R. 362 MIS SHANTI CONDUCTORS (P) LTD. ANR. v. ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos. 8442-8443of2016) AUGUST31,2016 [V. GOPALA GOWDA AND ARUN MISHRA, JJ.) Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial U11dertakings Act. 1993 - Suit for recovery of illferest under - Mai11tai11ability r~f - On facts, Stale Electricity Board placed supp~y orders on 31.3.1992 and 13.5.1992 - Supply completed by appellll11t on ../.10.1993 and last payment made on 5.3.199../ - Meanwhile. Act <~( 1993 came inlo jorce with effect ji·om 23. 9.1992 - On 1 O. I.1997. appellalll filing suil for recm•e1:y of Rs.53. 68 lacs on account of inlerest on delayed payments and fi1ture interest - Afaintllinllbility of the sui/ - Held: D[fference <!f opinion between the judges - Per V. Gop(l/a Gowda, J: Proi·isions of !he Act are retroactire in nature: and non consideration of !he said w.pect renders the Modern Industries case and Purbanchal Cables & Conductors Pvt. Ltd. case as sub silentio - Per Aru11 Mishra, J: Act of 1993 cannot be said to bi: retrospective in operation or having retroactive opera1io11 - SuppZv order having been placed before the date of co111111e11ce111ent £!/'the Act, that is he/iire 23. 9.1992. the beneficial provisions of the Act regarding higher i111ere.1·t would not be applicable. Per V. Gopala Gowda, J. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 Section 3 of the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 lays down the liability of the buyer to make payment before the appointed day, which, according to the definition in section 2, is the day after the expiry of 30 days from the delivery of the goods or the rendering of service. Section 4 of the Act provides the date from which the interest is payable. According to Section 4 of the Act, the liability on the buyer accrues from the appointed day. Section 2(b) of the Act makes explicitly clear, appointed clay is 362 M/S SHANTI CONDUCTORS (P) LTD. ANR. v. ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS. the clay following the expiry of thirty clays from the date of acceptance, which is the clay of delivery of goods or rendering of services. The language of the legislature could not have been more clearer than what has been explicitly made it very clear. It has clearly stated what the legislature had in contemplation at the time of enactment of the Act as the focal date was the date of actual delivery of goods or the rendering of services, and not the date on which the transaction was entered into. [Para 26] [388- G-H; 389-A-B] 1.2 While the statement of ob.iccts and reasons and Parliamentary debates cannot be used tu ascertain the meaning of the specific words of an enactment, the same can be used to understand the general context in which the legislation was passed by the Parliament, as well as the evil it sought to remedy. [Para 281 (389-E) Stale 4 Wes/ Bengal i: Subodh Gopal Bose AIR 1954 SC 92 : 1954 SCR 587; S1a1e of Gujarnt r. /1'1ir;apur Moti Kureshi Kasab .Jamal (2005) 8 SCC 534 : 2005 (4) Suppl. SCR 582 - referred to. 1.3 There is a need to reconcile the inconsistent legal tests for the applicability of the Act as laid clown in the decisions of this Court, 'date of contract altenition' in Modem Iudustries case; 'sale agreement' in P11rb1111clu1/ ease; date of 'transaction' and 'supply order' in 1h"sam Small Scale /11dustries case amt Slwkti Tubes case. [Para 32) [393-E] Modern Industries I'. Steel Aulhorily of l11dia Ltd. (2010) 5 SCC 44 : 2010 (4) SCR 560; Purbanc/wl Cables & Conductors I'l'I. Lid. v. Assam Slate Electricily Board & Anr. (2012) 7 SCC 462 : 2012 (6) SCR 905; Assum Small Scale industries Develop111e11t Corporation Ltd & Ors. v . .J.D. Plwr111aceuticals & Am: (2005) 13 SCC l 1) : 2005 (4) Suppl. SCR 232; Slwk1i Tubes v. State <d Bihm· & Ors. (2009) 7 SCC 673 : 2009 (10) SCR 739 - referred to. 1.4 A cumulative reading of the definition clauses of Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Act leave absolutely no room for doubt that the 363 A B c D E F G test for applicability of the Act is uot the date of transaction, or supply order, or contract alteration, but quite simply, the date of H 364 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016) 6 S.C.R. the delivery of goods or rendering of services.[Para 33) (393-E- FI 1.5 The phraseology of the Section 4 makes it amply clear th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.