9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 931X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ( BIFR ) under section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 ( Act 1 of 1986 ). BIFR appointed IDBI as the operating agency for the purpose of revival of the company. IDBI took steps for revival of the company through change of management. During 1994 the petitioner-company came forward with concrete proposals for take over and rehabilitation of the company and the petitioner-company deposited Rs. 8 crores as a sort of caution deposit along with take over bid. BIFR has sanctioned the scheme in favour of the writ petitioner-company on 7-8-1995. The petitioner- company took back all the workers into their respective jobs. The new promotees invested about Rs. 106 crores into the bank out of which Rs. 33 crores was paid to the financial institutions/banks and about Rs. 45 crores for renovation and additions in the plant and equipment and about Rs. 25 crores towards payment of pressing creditors, arrears of workers, statutory payments and pre-operative expenses. IDBI is an operating agency and other banks/institutions considered a modified rehabilitation package and recommended to BIFR by sanction of the modified sche ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order was received in the ordinary course on 21-9-1999 and the appeal was filed treating that copy as a certified copy. It is the case of the writ petitioner that for the purpose of getting a certified copy, respondents 3 to 15 ought to have made an application for a certified copy and after receiving the certified copy respondents 3 to 15 are entitled to file the appeal after deducting the time taken by the authorities in issuing the certified copy. The 1st respondent herein has rejected the objections by its order dated 20-1-2000 treating the copy served on respondents 3 to 15 as certified copy and has erroneously held that the appeal is within time. Assailing the order of the appellate authority in admitting the appeal and rejecting the objections and granting stay, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Sri E. Manohar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner has contended that BIFR has passed the order in the presence of all the parties on 2-8-1999 and admittedly respondents 3 to 15 have not applied for the certified copy but filed the appeal on 4-11-1999. He placed reliance on section 25 of Act 1 of 1986, read with the procedure for filing app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, should be filed in form of memorandum of appeal signed by the appellant or his attorney and should be accompanied by the following : ( i )A certified copy of the order appealed against. ( ii )True copies of all other documents relied upon by the appellant. ( iii )An index of the documents. ( iv )A list of all respondents including parties represented before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction. ( v )An affidavit verifying the contents of the memorandum of appeal and the date of receipt by the appellant of certified copy of the order appealed against. ( vi )Vakalatnama/power of attorney, where necessary. ( vii )Where the appellant seeks condonation of delay in filing the appeal, a separate application, supported by an affidavit. ( viii )Ten extra copies of the memorandum of appeal together with accompanying documents referred to at ( i ) to ( vi ) above. ( b ) The memorandum of appeal should be neatly and legibly typewritten, cyclostyled or printed on one side of foolscap size paper in double space and page numbered provided that true copies of documents prepared by any other mechanical or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant to file the appeal along with certified copy of the order appealed against and the time granted for filing such appeal is 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy and the appellate authority has the power to condone delay if it is filed within sixty days. In short, the maximum period permissible for filing an appeal is sixty days. According to the learned counsel, section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application for the proceedings under Act 1 of 1986. 6. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State 21st respondent has supported the case of the writ petitioner and contended that there was a detailed hearing on 2-8-1999 and there was an extensive discussion providing opportunity to all the parties including respondents 3 to 21 and the order was pronounced in open court in the presence of all the parties including respondents 3 to 21. It is also contended that the respondents-banks have supported the modified scheme and given their consent thereto in the proceedings on 2-8-1999 before the 2nd respondent. It is his contention that the order was dictated in open court in the presence of all the parties and hence limitation starts fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder intended to be appealed against, immediately after the order is passed by the BIFR and not wait for its receipt in usual course through postal channels etc. On receipt of the copy of the relevant order from BIFR the appeal should also be filed as early as possible. Copies of the correspondence entered into with BIFR for obtaining a copy of BIFR s order should be attached along with the appeal to establish that there has been no lack of efforts on the part of the party in obtaining a copy of the order. The party should also furnish invariably with the appeal concrete evidence regarding the date of receipt of the order of BIFR s order e.g., relevant document showing the date of receipt of the order appealed against. The Appellate Authority shall then be able to act more effectively and expeditiously in regard to the redressal of Appellant s grievances. Sd/- Secretary, Appellate Authority File No. AAIFR Rules/13(1)/89, dt. 28-3-1990." 7. Based on the aforementioned Press Note, it is contended by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as the learned Additional Advocate General that the aggrieved party must apply for a certified copy of the order intend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 1986 makes it clear that the appeal has to be filed within 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order is issued to him. In other words, the aggrieved party must file the appeal within 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order is supplied to the party concerned. The learned counsel for respondents 3 to 15 placed strong reliance on the wording copy of the order issued to him employed in sub-section (1) of section 25. He reiterated that the copy of the order issued to respondents is itself a certified copy and that there is no need to apply for any certified copy. A reading of section 25, read with the procedure for filing of appeals makes it clear that a certified copy of the order appealed against has to be filed along with the appeal and for the purpose of limitation the period of 45 days has to be calculated from the date of issuance of the certified copy of the order appealed against. Even the press note issued by the appellate authority also makes it very clear that the parties aggrieved by the order of the BIFR and intending to file an appeal should specifically apply for a copy of the order intended to be appealed against immediately after the order is p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Under Order 20 Rule 1 the court after the case has been heard, shall pronounce judgment in open court by dictation to Shorthand Writer, wherever it is permissible. It bears the date on which it is pronounced. The date of the judgment is never altered by the date on which the signature has been put subsequently. The date of the decree under Order 20 Rule 1, CPC would also be the date on which the judgment was pronounced. It is therefore clear that under the CPC stress is laid upon the pronouncement or delivery of the judgment as a judicial act, which has got legal effect." (p. 400) 12. The contention of the learned counsel for respondents 3 to 15 that limitation should be calculated from the date when the copy of the order received by the respondents unsustainable. Viewed from any angle, I hold that the aggrieved party must apply for a certified copy of the order appealed against immediately after its pronouncement and after receipt of the certified copy he should file the appeal within 45 days as contem-plated under section 25(1) of Act 1 of 1986, read with the procedure laid down in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 13 of Act 1 of 1986. The finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
