9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 467X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the executing Court that by virtue of section 22 of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the "SICA"), execution of a decree cannot proceed without consent of the BIFR. The executing Court has allowed the application for stay of execution by the impugned order P. 4 dated 29-7-2002, hence, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court by the petitioner assailing the same. 3. It is averred in the petition that petitioner undertakes painting of sign boards and "wall painting" work. Respondent Industry was originally under the name and style of M/s. Modi Cements which has been later on merged with respondent No. 1 M/s. Ambuja Cement Eastern Ltd. Petitioner was required to prepare boards and to do wall paintings. The work was done pursuant to the advertisements dated 13-12-1996 and 18-4-1997 which was duly completed by the petitioner. Petitioner issued bills dated 5-4-1997 for Rs. 19,908 and dated 20-12-1997 for Rs. 16,320 total Rs. 36,328.00 in the name of respondents and prayed for payment of the said bills. The bills were no honoured. As such petitioner had to file civil suit No. 4-B/99 which was decreed on 29-7-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut payment which is not permissible. Thus, the impugned order is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 6. Shri M.L. Jaiswal, learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, has submitted that section 22 of SICA bars all legal proceed- ings including execution. It is not a case of the labour of industrial concern, thus, the bar created under section 22 is fully attracted and is applicable to an execution of money decree. An application for setting aside an ex parte decree is pending. The impugned order is just and proper on facts and law and calls for no interference. 7. The main question for consideration is whether section 22 of SICA which stipulates about suspension of legal proceedings, no suit for recovery of money shall lie or be proceeded with and no proceedings for execution shall lie except with the consent of the Board, is attracted to the instant case. Section 22 is quoted below : " Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts, etc. (1) Where in respect of an industrial company, an inquiry under section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to under section 17 is under preparation or consideration or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation or w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate Authority or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation without the consent of the Board or the Appellate Authority. The Apex Court held thus : "12. . . . The provision regarding suspension of legal proceedings contained in section 22(1) seeks to advance the object of the Act by ensuring that a proceeding having an effect on the working or the finances of a sick industrial company shall not be instituted or continued during the period the matter is under consideration before the Board or the Appellate Authority or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation without the consent of the Board or the Appellate Authority. It could not be the intention of Parliament in enacting the said provision to aggravate the financial difficulties of a sick industrial company while the said matters were pending before the Board of the Appellate Authority by enabling a sick industrial company to continue to incur further liabilities during this period. This would be the consequence if sub-section (1) of section 22 is construed to bring about suspension of proceedings for eviction instituted by landlord against a sick industrial company which has ceased to enjoy the protection of the relevant r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e SICA was set up in defence. The observations of the Supreme Court in Shri Chamundi Moped Ltd. s case ( supra ) were considered. It was held in Modi Industries Ltd. s case ( supra ) that : "15. In my opinion the aforesaid reasoning adopted by Hon ble Supreme Court applies with full force to the facts of the present case also. The Parliament while putting section 22 of the Act 1985 could never have intended that the industrial unit under the garb of sickness or for any like difficulty may be allowed to shirk its liability to pay the wages to its workers for the work they have done. Thus proceedings under section 3 of the U.P. Act of 1978 will not be affected by section 22 of Act of 1985." 11. This Court also considered the provisions of section 22 of SICA. In Keshri Steels v. M.P. Electricity Board [1998] 2 MPLJ 535, it has been held that payment of arrears of electricity charges of M.P. Electricity Board for energy consumed by petitioner company, such a claim is neither loan nor an advance granted within the meaning of section 22 of SICA. This Court held that bar created by section 22 of SICA is not attracted to such charges as it is not a case of the loan granted to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
