Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was bound by the draft rehabilitation scheme by deemed consent under section 19(2) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and was consequently liable to issue a no dues certificate.
Analysis: The draft scheme was circulated to the petitioner for consent in relation to the proposed one-time settlement. The petitioner did not record any objection within the statutory period, nor did it dissent to the proposal when it was placed for consideration. Section 19(2) creates a legal fiction that consent is deemed to have been given if no consent is received within the prescribed time. Since the petitioner was a public financial institution and the scheme contemplated financial assistance or sacrifice from it, the statutory mechanism was attracted. On the facts found, the petitioner's subsequent stand that there had been no approval for settlement could not displace the consequence of its earlier non-response to the circulated scheme.
Conclusion: The petitioner was deemed to have consented to the one-time settlement under section 19(2), and the direction to issue the no dues certificate was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a draft rehabilitation scheme requiring financial sacrifice is circulated under section 19(2) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, failure to object within the statutory period results in deemed consent, binding the concerned financial institution to the sanctioned scheme.