Section 22 protection under sick company law does not bar repossession of hired machinery owned by the financier.

Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 protects proceedings against a sick company and its property, but it does not extend to repossession of machinery that remains the financier's property under a hire purchase arrangement. Where the agreement provides that title stays with the owner until all instalments are paid, the owner may retake possession on default. Proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 directed only at hired machinery are therefore treated as outside the section 22(1) bar.

---

---

Issues: Whether the protection under section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 barred proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking repossession of machinery hired under a hire purchase agreement.

Analysis: The hire purchase agreement treated the respondent as hirer and the appellant as owner. Under the contractual terms, title in the machinery did not pass to the hirer until all instalments were paid, and on default the owner was entitled to retake possession. The proceedings were directed only against the hired machinery, not against the company's own assets. The protection in section 22(1) extends to proceedings against the sick company or its properties, but does not bar repossession of goods which continue to belong to the financier under a hire purchase arrangement. The cited authorities on section 22(1) did not assist the respondent because they did not concern hired machinery.

Conclusion: Section 22(1) did not bar the appellant's application, and the appeal was maintainable and entitled to succeed.

---