https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108396 Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act did not bar a landlord's eviction suit against a sick industrial company, because the moratorium was confined to execution, distress, or similar recovery proceedings and not to possession recovery. On clear pleadings, where the tenant did not specifically deny service of the termination notice and only questioned its legal effect, the Court held that a decree for possession could be granted on admissions without recording evidence. The arrears claim stood on a different footing and was kept in abeyance pending examination of whether it was covered by the rehabilitation scheme, while future mesne profits were to be separately inquired into. en-us Fri, 31 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 13:20:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108396 Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act did not bar a landlord's eviction suit against a sick industrial company, because the moratorium was confined to execution, distress, or similar recovery proceedings and not to possession recovery. On clear pleadings, where the tenant did not specifically deny service of the termination notice and only questioned its legal effect, the Court held that a decree for possession could be granted on admissions without recording evidence. The arrears claim stood on a different footing and was kept in abeyance pending examination of whether it was covered by the rehabilitation scheme, while future mesne profits were to be separately inquired into. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 31 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108396