M.A. No. 63/2004. Case: Rishi Cement Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Bank of India. Ranchi Debt Recovery Tribunals

Case NumberM.A. No. 63/2004
CounselFor Appellant: D.K. Sinha, Adv. and For Respondents: Rakesh Jaiswal, Adv.
JudgesS.K. Mohapatra, Presiding Officer
IssueSick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985 - Sections 15(1), 16, 17, 22, 22(1) and 25
Judgement DateAugust 09, 2005
CourtRanchi Debt Recovery Tribunals


S.K. Mohapatra, Presiding Officer

  1. The instant Miscellaneous Application has been filed by Judgment Debtor No. 1, M/s Rishi Cement Co. Pvt. Ltd., for withdrawal of Recovery Proceeding No. 79/2002 or at least to stay the recovery proceeding in view of the protection granted Under Section 22 of SIC Act, 1985.

  2. The Petitioner - Judgment Debtor Company has stated on affidavit inter-alia that their reference Under Section 15(1) SIC Act was registered by BIFR as Case No. 85/2002 but subsequently was dismissed by BIFR on the ground of delay in filing. Petitioner preferred appeal No. 116/2003 before AAIFR against the aforesaid order dated 29.01.2003 of BIFR. The petitioner company has prayed for stay of recovery and protection Under Section 22 of SIC Act as their appeal before AAIFR is subjudice. Petitioner has enclosed a copy of appeal No. 116/2003 filed before AAIFR. Besides a copy of letter from the Under Secretary, AAIFR revealing the next date of hearing has been filed. That apart, petitioner has filed copy of letter dated 21.06.2005 of Roy & Associates, the Law firm, on the status of Appeal before AAIFR. Relevant portion of the letter is reproduced below which corroborates the submission of petitioner.

    "That the reference filed by your company i.e. M/s Rishi Cements Ltd. On the basis of its audited accounts for the financial year ended 31st March, 2002, under the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, with the Hon'ble BIFR was registered. The said reference of the company was rejected by the Hon'ble BIFR on the technical ground that he same was barred by limitation. Against the said order the company filed an appeal before the Hon'ble AAIFR, which was registered as AAIFR Appeal No. 116/2003.

    As required by yourself, we have made enquiries with the Hon'ble AAIFR about the status of the matter and mention that the said case is pending for hearing/adjudication. In view of the same, due to the proceedings pending Under Section 25 of SICA your company is protected against all the recovery proceedings as per the provisions of Section 22(1) of SICA".

  3. Despite opportunities, the decree holder bank has failed to appraise this Tribunal the present position of aforesaid appeal No. 116/2003. In view, of the aforesaid documents supported by affidavit and as the fact of pendency of appeal has not been specifically challenged by respondent bank, the affidavit has to be believed to the extent that appeal No...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT