SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 459

M. R. SHAH, SANJIV KHANNA
Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Amicus Curiae : Mr. K. V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Venkataraman, Adv. Mr. Amartya A. Sharan, Adv. Mr. Rahul Sangwan, Adv. Mr. M.G. Aravind Raj, Adv. Mr. Chanakya Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Sivagnanam Karthikeyan, Adv. Mr. Kartik Sundar, Adv.
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Swapnil Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ujjal Banerjee, AOR Ms. Aditi Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ahmar, Adv. Mr. Sadiq Noor, Adv. Mr. Dinkar Singh, Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel, AOR Ms. Urvashi Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Balbir Singh, A.S.G. Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mr. Navanjay Mahapatra, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. T S Sabrish, Adv. Mr. Naman Tandon, Adv. Mr. Samarvir Singh, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanchar Anand, Adv. Mr. Devendra Singh, AOR Mr. Shiv Kumar, Adv. Mr. Aman Kumar Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ajay Nain, Adv. Mr. Anmol Harna, Adv. Mr. Ankur Mittal, AOR Ms. Nidhi Mittal, Adv. Mr. Raushal Kumar, Adv. Ms. Yashika Sharma, Adv. Ms. Muskan Jain, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Pratap, AOR Ms. Prachi Pratap, Adv. Dr. Prashant Pratap, Adv. Mr. Akshay Singh, Adv. Ms. Avadhi Jain, Adv.

Table of Content
1. challenges under article 32 (Para 1)
2. legislative history and various legal provisions (Para 3)
3. arguments regarding the insolvency framework and prioritization (Para 4)
4. analysis of the impact and implementation of the ibc (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
5. comparison of ibc mechanism with companies act provisions (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
6. importance of economic legislation with a focus on workmen's dues (Para 15)
7. constitutional validity and conclusion on provisions of ibc (Para 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

Writ Petition (C) No. 421 of 2019

1. By way of this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, filed by the writ petitioner – Moser Baer Karamchari Union have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction or order striking down Section 327 (7) of the COMPANIES ACT , 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”) as arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

It is also prayed to issue an appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of Mandamus so as to leave the statutory claims of the “workmen’s dues” out of the purview of waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code , 2016 (hereinafter refe


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top