1991 Supreme(MP) 146
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
R. C. LAHOTI
BADRI PRASAD BALDEV PRASAD - Appellant
Versus
AEROFIL PAPER LTD.INDUSTRIAL AREA, BANMORE - Respondents
C. R. 16 Of 1991
Decided On : 03/15/1991
H.D.Gupta, J.GVALIOR, Vikas Jain
The phrase "financial obligations" in the M. P. Sahayata Upkram (Vishesh Upabandh) Adniniyam, 1978 (Act) should be interpreted broadly to include obligations involving financial implications, such as the recovery of the price of goods supplied to an industrial undertaking.
Headnote:
STAY OF PROCEEDINGS - RELIEF UNDERTAKING - M. P. SAHAYATA UPRAKRAM (VISESH UPABANDH) ADNINIYAM, 1978 (ACT) - S. 6 - STAY OF SUITS OR OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST RELIEF UNDERTAKING - SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY - PHRASE "FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS" - INTERPRETATION.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff, a mercantile firm, filed a suit against the non-petitioner industry, declared a relief undertaking under the M. P. Sahayata Upkram (Vishesh Upabandh) Adniniyam, 1978 (Act), for recovery of the price of goods supplied. The trial court stayed the proceedings based on Section 6 of the Act, which suspends suits and legal proceedings against relief undertakings during their designated period.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the phrase "financial obligations" in the Act's preamble should be interpreted broadly to include obligations involving financial implications, such as the recovery of the price of goods supplied to an industrial undertaking. Therefore, the stay of proceedings under Section 6 of the Act applies to the plaintiff's suit.
Issues: 1. Whether the phrase "financial obligations" in the Act's preamble should be interpreted narrowly to exclude obligations involving financial implications, such as the recovery of the price of goods supplied to an industrial undertaking. 2. Whether the stay of proceedings under Section 6 of the Act applies to the plaintiff's suit.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the phrase "financial obligations" in the Act's preamble broadly to include obligations involving financial implications, such as the recovery of the price of goods supplied to an industrial undertaking. 2. The court held that the stay of proceedings under Section 6 of the Act applies to the plaintiff's suit because the recovery sought is within the ken of the Act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff's revision petition, upholding the trial court's order staying the proceedings.
( 1 ) THE plaintiff/petitioner is aggrieved by an order of the trial Court staying the proceedings in a suit filed by the petitioner against the non-petitioner on account of the latter having been declared a relief undertaking within the meaning of Ss. 2 (3) and 3 of the M. P. Sahayata Upkram (Vishesh Upabandh) Adniniyam, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).
( 2 ) IT is not disputed that the non-petitioner industry has been declared a relief-undertaking u/s. 3 of the Act. Notification dated 8-6-1990 to that effect has been filed before the trial Court. The plaintiff/petitioner who is a mercantile firm has filed a suit for recovery of the price of the goods supplied by it to the non-petitioner.
( 3 ) SECTION 6 of the Act reads as under:"suspension of suits or other legal proceedings against relief undertaking.- As from the date specified in the notification under sub-section (1) of S. 3, no suit or other legal proceedings shall be instituted or commenced or, if pending, shall be proceeded with against the industrial undertaking during the period in which it remains a relief undertaking any law, usage, custom, contract, instrument, decree, order, award, settlement or other provisions whatsoever notwithstanding. "
( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has laid emphasis on the preamble to the Act which reads as under :-"an Act to enable the State Government to make special provisions for a limited period in respect of industrial relations, financial obligations and other like matters in relation to industrial undertakings the running of which is considered essential as a measure of preventing, or of providing relief against unemployment. "he relies on a Full Bench decision of this Court in The State of M. P. v. Mahant Kamal Puri (AIR 1965 MP 183), wherein it has been held (at page 184) :-"the preamble of a statute is a good means of finding out its meaning and, as it were, a key to the understanding of it. Indeed, the preamble may be regarded, like the title, as part of the statute for the purpose of explaining, restraining or even extending enacting words". He submits that the phrase "financial obligations" used in the preamble should act as key to the interpretation of the Act, also laying down its scope of applicability. In his submission, 'financial obligation' means, an obligation incurred by an undertaking on account of its activities having been financed by a financial institution such as a bank, Government, Finance Corporation etc. In his submission, the liability incurred on account of the goods having been supplied by a private party such as the plaintiff would not amount to 'financial obligation' and hence provisions of the Act do not apply to the present suit. It is difficult to agree with this submission.
( 5 ) THE phrase "financial obligation" has not been defined in the Act. In Black's Law Dictionary, the word "financial" has been shown as meaning fiscal, dealing in money". The term "obligation" has been defined to mean - "that which a person is bound to do or forbear; any duty imposed by law, promise, contract, relations of society, courtesy, kindness etc. " chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary defined "finance" to mean as "money affairs" and "financial" as "pertaining to finance". The term "obligation" has been defined to mean- "a moral or legal bond, tie or binding power; that to which one is bound; a debt of gratitude. " thus, the phrase has a wide connotation. Moreover, Phraseology as used in the Preamble speaks of "financial obligations and other like matters". It embraces matters akin to financial obligations, even if they be not strictly so. An undertaking may incur financial obligations not necessarily by merely borrowing the money from financial or financing institutions. It also incurs financial obligations by purchasing goods on credit and undertaking to pay the price in cash. To begin with the dealing may not be financial. But once the goods are purchased on credit, the obl