TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether discharge of the Court Receiver in respect of a part of the suit properties and handing over possession to the Receiver appointed by the DRT was barred by Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985.
Analysis: The relief sought was not for prosecution of the suit, winding up, execution, sale, or appointment of a receiver. It was a request to recall part of an earlier interim arrangement by discharging the Court Receiver for a limited portion of the property and placing that portion with the DRT Receiver. Such a direction would not require the Court Receiver to continue acting as an officer of the Court over that portion of the property, nor would it amount to continuation of the suit or to the kind of legal proceedings barred by Section 22. The objection that the property was subject to a joint realization arrangement did not prevent discharge, since the subsequent execution and distribution of recovery would remain governed by law in the appropriate forum.
Conclusion: The bar under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 did not apply, and the application for discharge of the Court Receiver and handing over possession to the DRT Receiver was maintainable.
TaxTMI 
