SICA jurisdiction ends when a company becomes non-sick and its net worth turns positive, allowing discharge from proceedings.

Jurisdiction under SICA continues only while a company remains a sick industrial company within section 3(1)(o). Once audited accounts show a positive net worth and the company is no longer sick, the statutory foundation for BIFR and AAIFR proceedings ends, and discharge from SICA follows. The analysis rejects the view that revival of operations must first be shown before discharge; cessation of sickness itself is sufficient to terminate jurisdiction. On the facts noted, the company had become non-sick and secured creditors had been paid, so continued BIFR jurisdiction was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether BIFR and AAIFR retain jurisdiction over a company after its net worth turns positive and it ceases to be a sick industrial company, and whether such company is entitled to discharge from the purview of SICA.

Analysis: The governing principle applied was that jurisdiction under SICA continues only so long as the company remains a sick industrial company within the meaning of section 3(1)(o) of the Act. Once the audited balance sheet shows a positive net worth and the company is no longer sick, the statutory basis for BIFR and AAIFR proceedings comes to an end. The order below was found to have proceeded on an incorrect understanding that revival of operations was necessary before discharge, whereas the controlling view was that cessation of sickness itself terminates the jurisdiction. Since the company's net worth had become positive and the secured creditors had been paid, the continuation of BIFR jurisdiction was held to be unsustainable.

Conclusion: BIFR and AAIFR ceased to have jurisdiction once the company became non-sick, and the company was entitled to be discharged from the purview of SICA.

---