9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (8) TMI 425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Electrical Engineer, the petition- ers had prayed for referring the dispute to the Electrical Inspector, which was not done illegally. 3. Shri Sudhir Agarwal, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, submitted, inter alia, that the prayers made by the petitioners are barred on account of applicability of the general principles of res judicata, the petitioners should have moved the authority after depositing the disputed amounts mentioned in the bills subject to the result of the decision of the electrical engineer. The dispute was not referable to the Electrical Inspector as it was not a case of defective meter. He, too, placed reliance on a number of decisions of this Court as well as the Apex Court. 4. The primal question, which requires to be answered by us, is as to whether the petitioner No. 1, which became sick since 26-2-1988, is entitled to the reliefs claimed for where the recovery of the amount of the electrical bills was/is sought to be recovered by the respondents on account of supply of the electrical energy to the petitioner No. 1 after it had become sick? 5. In our view, this question has to be answered in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the supplier will not be paid unless the consent of the Board is taken. 8. In Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. v. Church of South India Trust Association, AIR 1992 SC 1439, where the landlord filed a suit for eviction of the company after terminating the tenancy on the ground of default in payment of arrears of rent, the argument raised on behalf of the company that it is not liable to pay the rent or eviction as it has been declared a sick industry, was repelled by their Lordships of the Supreme Court explaining the object of the enactment in the following words: "We may, in this context, point out that, as indicated in the Preamble, the Act has been enacted to make special provisions with a view to securing the timely detention of sick and potentially sick companies owning industrial undertakings, the speedy determination by a Board of experts of the preventive, ameliorative, remedial and other measures which need to be taken with respect of such companies and the expeditious enforcement of the measures so determined. The provision regarding suspension of legal proceedings contained in section 22(1) seeks to advance the object to the Act by ensuring that a proceeding having a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectricity and thereafter say that recovery proceedings cannot be taken against it except with the permission of the Board under section 22(1). The petitioner was declared as a sick unit as early as on 26-2-1988. The recovery is for the period 1-10-1991 to 31-5-1996. Respondents are justi- fied in making the demand for electricity charges due against the peti- tioners. 13. The submission of Shri Singh that the decision of this Court was rendered in per curium and erroneous and, thus, requires reconsideration is devoid of any merit. Thus, we hold that prayer No. 1 cannot be allowed by us on account of the doctrine of res judicata. We further find that recently, the Apex Court in Dy. CTO v. Corromandal Pharmaceuticals AIR 1997 SC 2027 had further reconsidered the decision relied upon by Mr. Singh in relation to recovery of sales tax dues of the period after the industry had become sick and answered that the bar or embargo envis aged in section 22(1) can apply only to such of those dues reckoned or included in the sanctioned scheme and such amounts like sales tax, etc., which the sick company is enabled to collect after the date of the sanctioned scheme legitimately belongi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vance was also made by Shri Singh that the directions contained in the Court's order, dated 25-7-1997 were blatantly violated inasmuch as the accounts of the petitioners were seized by the recovery authority which is apparent from the letter dated 30-7-1997 addressed to the petitioners by the Punjab National Bank, Paltan Bazar, Dehradun. 19. The interim order, dated 25-7-1997 passed by this Court reads thus: "On the undertaking given by Shri S.P. Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the Writ Petition Nos. 21537/96 and 14434/97 to the effect that none of the petitioners or their directors or officers or employees shall sell, transfer or alienate any of the assets of the company or the director or the employee, it is hereby directed that the attachment of the property of the petitioners' mills as well as of the directors or the employees may be completed but no further action concerning personal property or coercive measures against the petitioners shall be subject to the further orders of this Court. This order will be operative till 2-8-1997 unless vacated or modified earlier. List/put up these three cases as first case in the supplementary cause list on 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
