Statutory protection under coal nationalisation law does not bar winding-up where qualifying conditions are not shown.

Section 32 of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 was held to apply only to a qualifying mining company whose coal mine had vested in the Central Government or a Government company under the Act. A company that did not establish ownership of such a coal mine could not claim the statutory protection, so a creditor's winding-up petition was not barred for want of Central Government consent. On the decree-based claim, the company did not show sufficient cause to resist admission, as the decree remained outstanding and no effective steps to set it aside were shown. The petition was therefore admitted, subject to security and costs.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether section 32 of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 barred a creditor's winding-up petition against the company without prior consent of the Central Government; (ii) Whether the company had shown sufficient cause to resist admission of the petition founded on an ex parte decree.

Issue (i): Whether section 32 of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 barred a creditor's winding-up petition against the company without prior consent of the Central Government.

Analysis: Section 32 applies only where the company is a mining company within the meaning of the Act and at least one coal mine owned by it has vested in the Central Government or a Government company under the Act. The company did not establish that it owned, or had owned, a coal mine, and the materials relied upon did not show that it satisfied the statutory description. The special protection under section 32 was therefore unavailable. The earlier authorities cited did not establish a general immunity from winding-up proceedings for the company.

Conclusion: The objection based on section 32 failed and the petition was not barred for want of Central Government consent.

Issue (ii): Whether the company had shown sufficient cause to resist admission of the petition founded on an ex parte decree.

Analysis: The decree remained outstanding, no effective steps had been shown to have been taken to set it aside, and no reply had been given to the statutory notice. A creditor may invoke the winding-up jurisdiction as an equitable mode of execution, though the Court retains discretion where the underlying claim is doubtful. On the materials before it, the company did not demonstrate that the decree-based claim lacked merit or that admission should be refused.

Conclusion: The petition was admissible and deserved to be admitted.

Final Conclusion: The winding-up petition was admitted, the preliminary objection was rejected, and the company was required to furnish security and pay costs to prevent further advertisement of the petition.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 32 of the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 protects only a qualifying mining company whose coal mine has vested under the Act, and that protection cannot be extended by implication to a company that does not satisfy those statutory conditions; a creditor's winding-up petition founded on a decree may be admitted where the decree remains unsatisfied and the debtor fails to show substantial merit in resisting it.

---