9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (9) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pite of the statutory notices issued under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, except in the case of Company Petition No. 27 of 1990. The various contentions put forth in all the company petitions and the allegations urged in the counters filed by the respondent-company need not be set out in detail because admittedly the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as "the BIFR or the Board") passed an order declaring the respondent-company a sick industrial company as defined under section 3(1)( o ) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The Central Legislature considering the imperative need to enact a legislation to provide for the tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e its net worth positive. If, on the other hand, the Board decides that it is not practicable for the sick industrial company to make its net worth positive within a reasonable time, the Board can direct any operating agency to prepare a scheme providing for measures for the revival of the company in any of the methods provided under section 18 of the Act. The scheme may also provide for financial assistance by way of loans, advances or guarantees or reliefs or concessions or sacrifices from the Central Government, a State Government, any scheduled bank or other bank, a public financial institution or State level institution or any institution or other authority to the sick industrial company. The Board is thus authorised to explore all pos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he industrial company shall lie or be proceeded with further except with the consent of the Board or the appellate authority. It is an admitted fact that in this case, SSSL has been declared as a sick industrial company under section 3(1)(o) of the Act and the Board is finding out ways and means of reviving the respondent-company. Thus, the BIFR is in seisin of the affairs of the respondent-company. Learned counsel for the petitioner in Company Petition No. 62 of 1987 submitted that the Board by its order dated January 9, 1990, has fixed the date as April 5, 1990, for hearing the suggestions and objections against the proposed winding up of the respondent-company and also directed issue of notices of hearing to the various institutions me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... viable. Certain guidelines are indicated in the said order about the scheme which should be proposed by the Canara Bank. It is not as if the Board ceased to continue its jurisdiction after the period of two months given to the Canara Bank for submitting a report suggesting a scheme for implementation has expired. Learned counsel for the respondent-company submitted that the Board had not met so far to consider the revival of SSSL and that a scheme is under preparation by the Canara Bank. Whatever it is, learned counsel for the petitioners in the various company petitions referred to above have not produced any order passed by the Board subsequent to May 15, 1990. Only two courses are open to the Board after making an inquiry as required und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that section 22 of the Act operates as a bar to this court's enquiring into the various company petitions filed for winding up of the respondent-company in the absence of the consent of the Board. Learned counsel for the respondent-company submitted that all the creditors who are parties to the various company petitions have appeared before the BIFR and are parties to the proceedings before the BIFR. That fact is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners. Even otherwise, by order dated January 9, 1990, the Board has directed issuance of notices of hearing not only to the various institutions mentioned in its order but has also directed that a general notice be published in two daily newspapers, one in English and one Telugu havi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the light of the provisions contained in sections 20 and 22 of the Act, I hold that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the company petitions pending indefinitely. The only consequence that follows is that the company petitions should be dismissed. I am supported in the view taken by me above by a Division Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court in Testeels Ltd. v. Radhaben Ranchhodlal Charitable Trust, AIR 1988 Guj. 213; [1989] 66 Comp. Cas. 555 wherein the learned judges held that under section 22 of the Act, the winding up proceedings already started against an industrial company can be dismissed and need not be kept in abeyance indefinitely without taking any further action in the matter. In the result, Company Petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
