https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106497 An amendment expanding section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 to cover money suits applies prospectively and cannot be used to stay a suit filed before the amendment took effect. Because the recovery suit had been instituted in 1992, when money suits were outside the statutory embargo, the later expansion of the stay provision did not govern that proceeding. The court held that the trial court had overlooked this material temporal distinction and wrongly applied the stay, making the order unsustainable. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106497 An amendment expanding section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 to cover money suits applies prospectively and cannot be used to stay a suit filed before the amendment took effect. Because the recovery suit had been instituted in 1992, when money suits were outside the statutory embargo, the later expansion of the stay provision did not govern that proceeding. The court held that the trial court had overlooked this material temporal distinction and wrongly applied the stay, making the order unsustainable. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 01 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106497