1980 Supreme(MP) 284
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
G. P. Singh C. J. and B. C. Varma, J.
PILANI INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
Decided On : Sep 17,1980
A.M.Mathur, ANIL BHATNAGAR, C.C.DWIVEDI, K.K.ADHIKARI, P.L.DUBEY, Proven Kumar, S.C.JAIN, S.K.Dubay, S.S.RAY,
( 1. ) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners challenge two orders issued by the Central Government under section 18 F B (1) (b) of the Industries (Development and Regulation)Act, 1951 and four orders issued under section 18fb (2) extending the operation of the said orders upto 1st January 1981. The petitioners also challenge the constitutional validity of sections 18 F B and 29 D of the Act.
( 2. ) PETITIONER No. 1 is an investment holding company and carries on the business of investment and financing monies for business and commercial purposes. Petitioner No. 2 is a share-holder of the petitioner-company. Respondent No. 3 is a company having a factory at Worli, Bombay, and another factory at Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh. The respondent company carries on the business of manufacturing bicycles, auto-engines and bicycle parts. The said industry is a scheduled industry under the Act. In June 1970, the petitioner company advanced a clean loan of Rs. 8. 5 lacs to the respondent-company repayable on demand on interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum. Another loan of Rs. 5 lacs was advanced by the petitioner-Company on the same terms in February 1971. Besides these loans the petitioner company in October 1970 executed a guarantee in favour of the State Bank of India upto limit of Rs. 15 lacs in respect of loans advanced by State Bank to the respondent company on cash credit facilities. By two orders passed on 3rd January 1974 under section 18a of the Act, the management of the whole of the undertakings of the respondent company at Bombay and ghaziabad was taken over for a period of five years. This period was extended from time to time. The undertakings of the respondent company are still managed by the Board of Management authorised under section 18a of the act by the Central Government. By two separate Orders issued on 29th january 1974, under section 18 FB (l) (b) of the Act, the Central Government suspended the operation of all contracts, agreements, etc. in force immediately before the date of issue of the orders (other than those relating to secured liabilities to banks and financial institutions) to which the said industrial undertakings of the respondent company or the company was a party for a period of one year. The orders in so far as relevant read as follows:-
"and whereas the Central Government is satisfied that in relation to the said industrial undertaking it is necessary so to do in the interests of the general public with a view to preventing fall in the volume of production of the scheduled industry, namely Bicycles and Bicycle chains industry; now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 18 F B of the Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the operation of all contracts, assurances of property, agreements, settlements, awards, standing orders or other instruments in force immediately before the date of issue of this Order (other than those relating to secured liabilities to banks and financial institutions) to which the said industrial undertaking or the owning such industrial undertaking is a party or which may be applicable to such industrial undertaking or company shall remain suspended for a period of one year and that all the rights, privileges, obligations and liabilities accruing or arising thereunder before the said date shall remain suspended for the said period. "
The period of continuance of the aforesaid orders was extended from time to time upto 2nd January 1979 under section 18 FB (2 ). By two orders passed on 1st January 1979, the period of the operation of these orders was extended upto and inclusive of 1st January 1980. On 19th January 1975 the petitioner company filed a suit in the Court of the District Judge, Gwalior, against the respondent company for recovery of Rs. 19,22,260. 97, the amount due on the two loans. The District Judge by his order dated 30th July, 1977 rejected the plaint und