Appeal No. 357 of 2014. Case: GTC Industries Ltd. Vs Central Bank of India and Ors.. High Court of Bombay (India)
| Case Number | Appeal No. 357 of 2014 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Anand Aggarwal, Advocate and For Respondents: A.K.D. Saraye representing Vinay Sharma, Advocates and Swarnima Singh, Law Officer |
| Judges | Ranjit Singh, J. (Chairperson) |
| Issue | Sick Industrial Companies (special Provisions) Act, 1985 - Sections 22, 22(1) |
| Citation | 2016 (I) BC 55 (DRAT) |
| Judgement Date | July 21, 2015 |
| Court | High Court of Bombay (India) |
Judgment:
Ranjit Singh, J. (Chairperson)
-
Whether the proceedings before the Tribunal can continue once the guarantor Company is before the BIFR in view of Section 22 of SICA is an issue raised in the present appeal. The appellant had approached the Tribunal below by way of appeal against the order dated February 12, 2013 passed by the Recovery Officer for setting aside the direction given by the Receivers on 16th February, 2013. The plea of the appellant before the Tribunal below was that the Company had filed Modified Draft Rehabilitation Scheme before the BIFR which was pending implementation. According to the appellant, there would be a bar for continuation of execution proceedings in terms of Section 22(1) of SICA.
-
This plea was opposed by the Counsel for the Bank, who while relying upon the judgment in the case of Inderjeet Arya & Anr. v. ICICI Bank, I (2014) BC 111 (SC): I (2014) SLT 148: I (2014) CLT 43 (SC): (2014) 2 SCC 229, had urged that the proceedings under the RDDBFI Act will have priority over the proceedings under SICA. The Tribunal below took note of the observations in the case of Inderjeet Arya (supra) where the Court while taking note of the observations made in the case of Kailash Nath Aggarwal v. Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment Corporation of U.P. Ltd., II (2003) SLT 81: II (2003) BC 296 (SC): (2003) 4 SCC 305 has held that even though both the conflicting status SICA and the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act contain a non obstante clause but in case of conflict the RDDBFI Act will prevail over the SICA.
-
Three Judges of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of KSL and Industries Ltd. v. Arihant Threads Ltd. & Ors., IX (2014) SLT 229: IV (2014) BC 596 (SC): 2014(12) SCALE 313 have now...
To continue reading
Request your trial