Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts etc.

Last updated: 03 April 2008

Court :
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Brief :

Citation :
Vinod Kumar M. Gadia v. SICOM Ltd. DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ. APPEAL NO. 205 OF 2006 AND MISC. PETITION NO. 61 OF 2000

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY Vinod Kumar M. Gadia v. SICOM Ltd. DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ. APPEAL NO. 205 OF 2006 AND MISC. PETITION NO. 61 OF 2000 April 18, 2006 Section 22 of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 - Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts etc. - Appellants sought to challenge order passed by Single Judge in petition under section 31(aa) of State Financial Corporation Act alleging that in view of section 22, above proceedings could not have been proceeded with against them who were only guarantors - Whether in view of judgment of same High Court in Dewal Singhal v. State of Maharashtra [2001] 106 Comp. Cas. 587, only proceeding against guarantor of a loan granted to an industrial company which has been declared sick under Act, which is barred under section 22, is a ‘suit; and nothing else - Held, yes - Whether since proceeding before Single Judge was not a suit at all, there was no error in judgment of Single Judge - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, instant appeal being devoid of any merit was to be dismissed - Held, yes CASE REVIEW Dewal Singhal v. State of Maharashtra [2001] 106 Comp. Cas. 587 - Followed.