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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.V.S. Rao, J.
KRISHI FOUNDRY EMPLOYEES UNION - Appellant
Vs.
KRISHI ENGINES LIMITED AND OTHERS - Respondent
CA No's. 319 and 320 of 2002 in CP No. 14 of 1987
Decided on : 10-01-2003

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant : L. Venkateswar Rao
For The Respondent: M. Anil Kumar, (Official Liquidator), N. Subba Reddy and V.S. Raju

Headnote:

COMPANY - WINDING UP - SUBSIDIARY COMPANY - WORKMEN OF SUBSIDIARY COMPANY - CLAIM FOR WAGES - WHETHER WORKMEN OF SUBSIDIARY COMPANY CAN BE TREATED AS WORKMEN OF HOLDING COMPANY - DOCTRINE OF LIFTING THE VEIL - SECTION 529A OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 - APPLICABILITY.

Fact of the Case:

Krishi Foundry Limited (subsidiary company) became sick and its management was taken over by APIDC. APIDC stopped operations of the subsidiary company along with operations of holding company without any lay off or lock out. The employees were discharged from their duties. APIDC did not pay wages of the workers since 1986. The workers filed a claim petition with Official Liquidator along with workers of the holding company. The Official Liquidator passed an order that the claim of the union cannot be included in the claim of the workmen of holding company in liquidation against estate of the holding company. The subsidiary company was ordered to be wound up. The union filed two applications. C.A. No. 319 of 2002 is filed under Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 praying this Court to hold that the workers of the Krishi Foundry Limited are entitled to claim wages against the available assets of the holding company and for a consequential direction to Official Liquidator to admit and quantify the claims of the workers of the company and pay them out of the assets of the holding company. C.A. No. 320 of 2002 is filed for ad interim order to direct the Official Liquidator to keep apart an amount of Rs. 1,94,06,312/- out of the assets of the holding company.

Finding of the Court:

1. The doctrine of lifting the veil can be applied in the case of holding company and subsidiary company. However, the same is not universal principle. 2. The legal position in India is no different. 3. The workmen of subsidiary company cannot be treated as workmen of holding company. 4. Section 529-A of the Companies Act, 1956 has no application to the employees of the subsidiary company.

Issues: 1. Whether the doctrine of lifting the veil can be applied to treat the workmen of subsidiary company as workmen of holding company? 2. Whether Section 529-A of the Companies Act, 1956 is applicable to the employees of the subsidiary company?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The doctrine of lifting the veil is permissible if public interest requires. This is also subject to considerations of permissibility as per the statute. If the company uses other concern; a firm, society or association, only to facilitate evasion of legal obligation like payment of direct or indirect taxes or denial of statutory benefits to workmen, the Court has to disregard the separate legal entity of the company. 2. Section 529-A of the Companies Act, 1956 which was inserted by Companies (Amendment) Act, 1985 the dues of the workmen shall be given top priority to all other debts. Therefore, the dues of the workmen of the company in liquidation without any doubt are 'claims against the company' subject to proof and not all persons engaged by a holding company directly or indirectly can be 'treated as workmen.

Final Decision: The applications are dismissed with no order as to costs.

ORDER :

V.V.S. Rao, Adv.

Introduction

1. M/s. Krishi Engines Limited (hereinafter called, holding company) was ordered to be wound up by this Court by judgment dated 16.10.2000 passed in C.P. No. 64 of 1997. The Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as Provisional Liquidator u/s 452 of Companies Act, 1956 (for short, the Act). The liquidation process of the holding company is at final stages. M/s. Krishi Foundry Employees Union (hereinafter called, the Union) filed a claim petition with Official Liquidator along with workers of the holding company. The Official Liquidator after adjudication of their claim passed an order dated 15.4.1997 to the effect that the claim of the Union cannot be included in the claim of the workmen of holding company in liquidation against estate of the holding company. When the Official Liquidator adjudicated claim of the union the subsidiary company was not in liquidation. Be it also noted that the order of the Official Liquidator dated 15.4.1997 became final and it was not challenged before any authority much less this Court.

The Present Company Applications

2. M/s. Krishi Foundry Limited (hereinafter referred to as subsidiary) which was initially incorporated us Private Limited Company under the Act on 4.2.1961 later converted as Public Limited Company (hereinafter called, subsidiary company) in 1976 and became a subsidiary of the holding company in the same year. The subsidiary company had 69 employees on its rolls. It was catering to the requirements of its holding company by manufacturing mouldings and engine components. The subsidiary became sick and its management was taken over by A.P. Industrial Development Corporation (APIDC) by virtue of orders issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh being G.O. Ms. No. 150, dated 18.2.1976 and G.O. Ms. No. 151 dated 4.4.1988. But, APIDC stopped operations of the subsidiary company along with operations of holding company without any lay off or lock out. The employees were discharged from their duties. APIDC did not pay wages of the workers since 1986. As per orders of this Court in W.A. Nos. 1 159, 1183 and 1371 of 1987 wages were paid for three months from October, 1986 to December, 1986. In those circumstances, the applicant union issued a statutory notice dated 5.4.1997 calling upon the subsidiary company to pay dues within three weeks from the date of receipt of notice and having received no response, the Union filed Company Petition No. 64 of 1997 under Sections 433(e) and (f), and 439 of the Act for winding up the subsidiary company. This Court ordered advertisement of the petition, but none appeared. As many as sixty two employees filed affidavits before the Company Court. This Court by order dated 16.10.2000 ordered winding up of Krishi Foundry Limited.

3. The petitioner Union claims that for all practical purposes, the business of the subsidiary company was treated as part of the holding company. Both the companies are one economic entity and the business transactions, property, bank, employees and management of both the companies are treated as one unit. They are different operating spheres of single business unit and entire financing was by the holding company. The workers and employees of subsidiary company and holding company were considered inter-transferable and they were transferred to subsidiary company to holding company and vice versa on regular basis. They contend that all the assets of the subsidiary company can be called upon to satisfy the liabilities of the holding company which is in liquidation and conversely, the assets of the holding company can be held responsible for the debts and liabilities of the subsidiary company,

4. It is their further case that the subsidiary company has no assets of its own except two factory sheds allotted by the A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (APIIC) on hire purchase in 1977. The total claim of all the members of the Union is to the tune of Rs. l,94,06,312/-. They

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top