# In the matter of TA Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd. CP(IB) No. 278-09-HDB-2020

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-02-28. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-04414. Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB, an operational creditor, filed an application to…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 28 Feb 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-04414
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/ta-hydraulics-pvt-ltd-cpib-no-278-09-hdb-2020-9a545e81

## Summary

### Background

Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB, an operational creditor, filed an application to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against TA Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd, a corporate debtor, alleging default in repayment of an operational debt. The debt arose from an excess payment mistakenly made by Sandvik to TA Hydraulics. Sandvik had issued purchase orders to TA Hydraulics for the supply of materials. TA Hydraulics provided quotations, manufactured, and delivered the materials, issuing invoices for Rs.4,30,110. However, Sandvik mistakenly paid USD 430,110 instead of INR 4,30,110, resulting in an excess payment of Rs.2,99,14,150. Sandvik requested a refund, but TA Hydraulics expressed difficulty in refunding the amount, leading to a dispute.

## Facts

Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB (Operational Creditor) required materials from TA Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd (Corporate Debtor). TA Hydraulics provided quotations on 2018-06-04 for Rs.2,92,500 and Rs.72,000. Sandvik issued purchase orders on 2018-06-15. TA Hydraulics manufactured and delivered the materials, issuing invoices dated 2019-01-11 for Rs.4,30,110. On 2019-02-13, Sandvik mistakenly paid USD 430,110 instead of INR 4,30,110, resulting in an excess payment of Rs.2,99,14,150. Sandvik requested a refund via email on 2019-02-28, but TA Hydraulics expressed difficulty in refunding the amount on 2019-07-03. Sandvik issued a demand notice on 2020-05-15 under Section 8(1) of IBC. TA Hydraulics replied on 2020-06-05, denying liability and claiming a detailed

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether an excess sum paid mistakenly by the operational creditor to the corporate debtor is in the …

**Ratio:** For a 'debt' to be categorized as an 'operational debt' under Section 3(6) of the IB

…

**Reasoning:** The tribunal reasoned that the excess payment was not made in pursuance of the terms and

…

**Interpretation:** A quasi-contract arises when no such contract between the parties exists. A

…

**Application:** The tribunal found that the excess payment was not directly related to the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Venkata Ramakrishn…; Satya Ranjan…
- **Appellants:** Sandvik Mining &…
- **Respondents:** TA Hydraulics Pvt…

## Timeline

- **2018-06-04 — Quotations P…**: TA Hydraulics provided two quotations to Sandvik for supply of material at a cost of…
- **2018-06-15 — Purchase Order…**: Sandvik issued two purchase orders to TA Hydraulics for supply of material at a cost of…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 5(21) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-5)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/ta-hydraulics-pvt-ltd-cpib-no-278-09-hdb-2020-9a545e81