https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108238 Civil court jurisdiction remains available unless expressly or necessarily impliedly barred. Alleged illegal dispossession and continuing possession constitute an essentially civil dispute, and the Companies Act, 1956 did not exclude the ordinary civil remedy, including relief consistent with the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The civil suit was therefore maintainable. A review direction permitting a stay application before the District Magistrate to halt an appellate inquiry conflicted with the prior requirement of expeditious statutory adjudication. That direction was unsustainable; the appellate proceedings were required to continue expeditiously, and the impugned orders were set aside with remand for a fresh merits decision. en-us Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 10:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108238 Civil court jurisdiction remains available unless expressly or necessarily impliedly barred. Alleged illegal dispossession and continuing possession constitute an essentially civil dispute, and the Companies Act, 1956 did not exclude the ordinary civil remedy, including relief consistent with the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The civil suit was therefore maintainable. A review direction permitting a stay application before the District Magistrate to halt an appellate inquiry conflicted with the prior requirement of expeditious statutory adjudication. That direction was unsustainable; the appellate proceedings were required to continue expeditiously, and the impugned orders were set aside with remand for a fresh merits decision. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108238