Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: sick industrial companies special provisions act 1985 section 5 constitution of appellate authority Page 4 of about 27,383 results (0.670 seconds)

Bhailal Kalidas Barot Vs. Factory Manager, Jehangir Textile Mills Ltd. ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2003)1GLR629; (2003)IILLJ355Guj; [2003]46SCL56(Guj)

..... be released either by order of this court or by the order of the appellate authority in view of the fact that the respondent employer company is declared to be a sick industrial undertaking under the provisions of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985. it is stated in the affidavit filed on their behalf that the case of the respondent-corporation is registered as case ..... gratuity would amount to execution or coercive recovery, which was prohibited by the aforesaid provisions.section 22(1) of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 reads as under :-'22 - suspension of legal proceedings, contract etc,(1) where in respect of an industrial company, an inquiry under section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to under section 17 is under preparation or consideration or .....

Rajiv Kumar Vs. Bci Staff Colony Residential Welfare Association

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... culled out from the record are that m/s bharat commerce & industries limited (hereinafter referred to as bci ) was declared a sick company and for disposal of assets of bci pursuant to directions of board for industrial and financial reconstruction (bifr) under section 20(4) of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985(hereinafter being referred to as the act 1985 ..... parties and with their assistance perused the material on record.22. the process was initiated by the operating agency (idbi) to sell the subject assets of the sick industrial company (bci) in terms of the order passed by the bifr in exercise of its power under section 20(4) of the act, 1985. pursuant thereto, ..... for any one or more of the following, namely:- (a) to (j) xxx xxx xxx (k) method of sale of the assets of the industrial undertaking of the sick industrial company such as by public auction or by inviting tenders or in any other manner as may be specified and for the manner of publicity therefor; 21. .....

Pasupati Haryana Woolen Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : [2002]125STC463(P& H)

..... .3. the petitioner alleges that it suffered huge losses. it filed a petition under section 15(1) of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (in short 'sica'). on july 21, 1995, the petitioner was declared a sick company. an operating agency to prepare a rehabilitation scheme was appointed. on august 27, 1998, the petitioner was given a ..... notice to show cause as to why the board should not order the company to be wound-up. on december 15, 1998, orders for its ..... provides that the exemption can be granted 'for such period and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed'. the purpose is obvious. it is to ensure industrial development. the conditions, etc., have been prescribed in the haryana general sales tax rules, 1975. rule 28a contained in chapter iv-a of the rules regulates .....

Allahabad Bank Vs. Canara Bank and Another

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2000(3)ALLMR(SC)475; 2000(2)CTC723; JT2000(4)SC411; 2000(3)SCALE169; (2000)4SCC406; [2000]2SCR1102

..... , 1948 (15 of 1948), the state financial corporations act, 1951 (63 of 1951), the unit trust of india act, 1963 (52 of 1963), the industrial reconstruction bank of india act, 1984 (62 of 1984) and the sick industrial companies (special provisions ) act, 1985(1 of 1986).the provisions of section 34(1) clearly state that the rdb act overrides other laws to the extent of ..... is there in the rdb act, namely, section 34. a similar situation arose in maharashtra tubes ltd. v. state industrial and investment corporation of india : [1993]1scr340 where there was inconsistency between two special laws, the finance corporation act, 1951 and the sick industries companies (special provisions) act, 1985. the latter contained section 32 which gave overriding effect to its provisions and was held to prevail .....

Employers in Relation to the Management of Flaritand Colliery of Bccl ...

Court : Jharkhand

Reported in : 2002(50)BLJR1351; [2002(94)FLR644]; (2002)IIILLJ175Jhar

..... dismissed as withdrawn. it appears from the order dated 26.7.2001 referred to above the appellant had approached the bifr under the provisions of sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 and the bifr also rejected the appellant's prayer for stay and instead clearly directed that the appellant should implement the ..... back wages as per direction of the impugned award, the bccl has become a sick industrial company under the meaning of the provisions of sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (in short 'sica') and an application has been made before the board of industrial and financial reconstruction (in short 'bifr') new delhi under section 15(1) ..... in air india statutory corporation v. united labour union, (1997) 9 scc 377, has been overruled prospectively with a declaration that any direction of industrial adjudicator any court including the high court for absorption of contract labour following the judgment in air india case shall hold good and that the same .....

Tungabadra Sugar Works Mazdoor Sangh Represented by Its President Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2009)8MLJ15

..... , 1948 (15 of 1948), the state financial corporations act, 1951 (63 of 1951), the unit trust of india act, 1963 (52 of 1963), the industrial reconstruction bank of india act, 1984 (62 of 1984) and the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (1 of 1986).the provisions of section 34(1) clearly state that the rdb act overrides other laws to the extent of ..... provision is there in the rdb act, namely, section 34. a similar situation arose in maharashtra tubes ltd. v. state industrial and investment corporation of maharashtra ltd. where there was inconsistency between two special laws, the finance corporation act, 1951 and the sick industries companies (special provisions) act, 1985. the latter contained section 32 which gave overriding effect to its provisions and was held to prevail .....

Metal Box India Ltd. Vs. B.R. Rangari, Asst. Commissioner of Labour an ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2006(6)ALLMR187; 2006(4)BomCR159; [2006(111)FLR466]; (2006)IIILLJ686Bom

..... the impugned order. 9. the last contention which has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that in view of the provisions of section 22 of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985, the authority should not have passed an order and there was a bar from initiating the proceeding for the recovery of the said dues. the learned counsel ..... all its manufacturing units and approached bifr for a revival scheme, on 27.5.88 the bifr declared the company as a sick undertaking within the meaning of section 3(1)(c) of sica, 1985. in 1988 the present management took over the company and ultimately reopened the mahol unit in july, 1988 and the deonar unit in october, 1988. in 1992 they .....

Smt. Sudarshan Chopra and ors. Vs. Vijay Kumar Chopra and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : [2003]117CompCas660(P& H)

..... the state financial corporations act, 1951 (63 of 1951), the unit trust of india act, 1963 (52 of 1963), the industrial reconstruction bank of india act, 1984 (62 of 1984) and the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (1 of 1986).'11.1 in addition, it is emphasised that the allahabad bank v. canara bank ..... of india (1994) 2 comp lj 346 (sc) : (1993) 2 scc 144, where there was inconsistency between two special laws, the state financial corporations act, 1951, and the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985. the latter contained section 32 which gave overriding effect to its provisions and was held to prevail over ..... the former. it was pointed out by ahmadi, j., that both special statutes, contained non obstante clauses, but that the --' .....

Bank of India Vs. Ketan Parekh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2008SC2361; 2008(5)ALLMR(SC)983; 2008(3)AWC3091(SC); III(2008)BC247; 2008(56)BLJR2070; [2008]143CompCas711(SC); (2008)5MLJ1097(SC); (2008)151PLR662; 2008(8)SCALE327; 2008AIRSCW3903; AIR2008SC2360; 2008(8)SCC148

..... state financial corporation act, 1951 (63 of 1951), the unit trust of india act, 1963 (52 of 1963),the industrial reconstruction bank of india act, 1984 (62 of 1984), the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 and the small industries development bank of india act, 1989.5. the admitted facts are that the respondent no. 1- ketan parekh was a ..... of life insurance corporation act and the rules framed thereunder held that the case will be covered by the industrial disputes act. it was observed per krishna iyer, j as follows:in determining whether a statute is a special or a general one, the focus must be on the principal subject-matter plus the particular perspective. for ..... 3(2) of the act of 1992 and not the company k. company d owed money from company k and its subsidiaries and it was in execution of the decree passed in the favour of company d, the property of company k was put to auction. thus, the special court could not have entertained the application moved by the income .....

Standard Stonewares and Tiles Vs. Appellate Authority

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2004(2)KLT519; (2004)IIILLJ403Ker

..... aluva. as the above establishment was facing severe financial problems the petitioner-establishment had been declared on 20.3.1990 as a sick industrial company under the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985. the board of industrial and financial reconstruction, new delhi had prepared a rehabilitation scheme envisaging certain sacrifices from the part of the petitioner as well as ..... become payable till it was paid with simple interest at such rate fixed by the central government. the supreme court in h. gangahanume gowda karnataka agro industries corporation ltd., (2003) 3 scc 40 held that the interest on delayed payment of grauity under section 7(3-a), was mandatory and the ..... on or before 31.10.1994. the above agreement had been approved by the bifr. respondents 2 to 5 had received the gratuity amount from the company during october 1, 994. later, the respondents 2 to 15 filed claim petitions before the authority for delayed payment of gratuity and also claiming balance .....