Court : DRAT Madras
Reported in : I(2006)BC54
..... contract or for making any alteration or modification therein, as provided in sub-clause (2) of proviso to section 30 of the sick textile undertakings (nationalisation) act, 1974 (hereinafter called the 'act'). admittedly, the appellant had not chosen to refuse or ratify the contract entered into by the respondent with the 1st defendant mill and, ..... the said sum of rs. 2,87,785/- with interest thereon should have been paid by the appellant as it became the owner under the sick textile undertakings (nationalisation) act, 1974. the respondent was made to pay the said amount to the japanese company for the purchase of machinery and, therefore, the appellant is bound ..... rs. 2,87,785/- was disallowed.5. it is the contention of the learned advocate for the appellant that the commissioner appointed under the sick textile undertakings (nationalisation) act, 1974, is a competent person to decide about the claims and to make the payments and when once the commissioner disallowed the payments made by the .....
Tag this Judgment!