Back
S.C.AGRAWAL, M.M.PUNCHHI, N.M.KASLIWAL
Shree Chamundimopeds LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Church Of South India Trust Association Csicinod Secretariat, Madras – Respondent
Key Points: - The stay order does not revive or render pending the previously disposed Appellate Authority order; it does not undo the Appellate Authority’s dismissal of the appeal. (!) - Section 22(1) provides that suspension applies only when certain conditions are pending (Board inquiry under Section 16, or Section 17 scheme under preparation, or sanctioned scheme under implementation, or pending appeal under Section 25); eviction proceedings against a sick industrial company are not automatically suspended. (!) (!) - Eviction proceedings against a tenant that is a sick company are not covered under category (2) of Section 22(1) (proceedings against the properties of the company) where the tenant’s interest is protected as a statutory tenant under Karnataka Rent Control Act, hence not barred by Section 22(1). (!) (!) - The Court held that Section 22(1) does not bar eviction proceedings against a sick industrial company; the leasehold interest of a statutory tenant is not "property" for the purposes of Section 22(1). (!) (!) - The overall appeals were dismissed; no order as to costs. (!)
JUDGMENT
S.C. AGRAWAL, J.:- These appeals filed by M/s.Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. raise questions involving the interpretation of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to as the Act.
2. The appellant is a public limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It was set up with the object of manufacturing mopeds in collaboration with Cycle Peugot of France. It has set up a factory at Hirahalli in Tumkur district of Karnataka State. The appellant company has taken on rent the premises belonging to the Church of South Indian Trust Association, respondent No. 1 in these appeals, in Bangalore on a monthly rent of Rs. 21,159/-. The appellant company committed default in payment of rent and as on March 31, 1987 a sum of Rs. 2,45,534/- was payable as rent to the respondents. The respondents issued a legal notice dated 1st April, 1987 calling upon the appellant company to pay the said amount. The appellant company while admitting the liability to pay the aforesaid sum stated that it was expecting certain sums of money towards developmental loan from the Government of Karnataka and as soon as the same was received it would c
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
