( 1 ) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 8. 11. 96 passed by the trial Court rejecting his application under Section 22 (1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter SICA, for short) paying for stay of the suit.

( 2 ) THE petitioner company took the premises belonging to the plaintiff-respondent for three years under a lease agreement dated 16-4-1992. On 2-8-1993, the petitioner company has been declared a sick company and proceedings under Sections 16 and 17 of SICA are going on against it. On 22-12-1995, the plaintiff-respondent has filed a suit seeking a decree for recovery of possession over the premises held by the petitioner company and a decree for arrears of rent to the tune of Rs. 1,77,840. 00 on account of arrears of rent for the period November, 1994 to November, 1995 calculated at the rate of Rs. 13680. 00 per month. the tenancy of the petitioner company as terminated with the end of November, 1995. Mesne profits and damages at the rate of Rs. 90. 00 per sq ft have been asked for from 1-12-1995 to 15-12-1995 amounting to Rs. 38475. 00 alongwith a relief for further damages/mesne profits and interest on the said amount.

( 3 ) SECTION 22 (1) of SICA provides as under :

`22. Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts, etc:- (1) Where in respect of an industrial company an inquiry under Section 16 is pending of any scheme referred to under Section 17 is under preparation or consideration or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation or where an appeal under Section 25 relating to an industrial company is pending, then, notwithstanding any hing contained in the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), or any other law or the memorandum and articles of association of the industrial company or any other instrument having effect under the said Act or other law, no proceedings for the winding up of the industrial company or for execution, distress or the like against any of the properties of the industrial company or for the appointment of a receiver in respect thereof shall lie or be proceeded with further, except with the consent of the Board or, as the case may be, the Appellate Authority. (emphasis supplied)

( 4 ) SICA was amended by Act No. 12 of 1994 which came into force on 1. 2. 94. Several provisions of SICA have been amended. For the purpose of the case at hand, what is relevant is the amendment made in sub section (1) of S. 22. By Section 12 (a) of the Amendment Act, the following words have been added after the words "appointment of a receiver in respect thereof in the text of the principal Act--

"and no suit for recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect of any loans or advance granted to the industrial company. "

( 5 ) THE question arising for decision is whether the suit of the nature filed by the plaintiff attracts the applicability of S. 22 (1) of SICA (as amended ).

( 6 ) IN M/s Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd v. Church of South India Trust Association Madras AIR 1992 SC 1439, unamended Section 22 (1) of SICA came up for consideration of their Lordships. The appellant company had taken premises of the respondent No. 1 on a monthly rent of Rs. 21159. 00. The appellant company committed a 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. Legal notice dated 1. 4. 87 was served. On 26. 2. 88, the respondents filed a petition seeking eviction of the Company on the ground of arrears of rent. Prayer by the company for stay under S. 22 of SICA was refused. The question posed before their Lordships was - "are the proceedings instituted by landlord for eviction of a tenant who is a sick company from the premises at out to it required to be suspended under S. 22 (1) of the Act. " Their Lordships have held "the following proceedings are automatically suspended under S. 22 (1) of the Act:

1) Proceedings for winding up of the