Held:
"A bare reading
of the Section 22 of the SICA makes the position clear
that during pendency of an inquiry under Section 16
or during the preparation of a scheme referred to under
Section 17 or during implementation of a sanctioned
scheme or pendency of an appeal under Section 25, no
proceedings for 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 and no
suit for the recovery of money or for enforcement of
any security against the industrial company or of any
guarantee in respect of any loans or advance granted
to the industrial company, shall lie or be proceeded
with further, except with the consent of the Board or,
the Appellate Authority, as the case may be. The section
only deals with proceedings for recovery of money or
for enforcement of any security or a guarantee in respect
of any loans or advance granted to the company and a
proceedings for winding up of the company. The section
does not refer to any criminal proceeding. In B.S.I.
Ltd. and Anr. v. Gift Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Criminal Appeal
No. 847 of (1999) we held that pendency of proceeding
under Section 22(1) of SICA alone is not sufficient
to get absolved from the liability under Section 138
of the NI Act."
|
