https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109100 Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act does not automatically stay proceedings against a guarantor merely because the industrial company is before BIFR; the protection extends only where the guarantee relates to a loan or advance granted to the industrial company, so the suit against the guarantor continued. A transaction described as lease finance was held to be a genuine lease where ownership stayed with the lessor, the lessee had only lease rights, and repossession rights on default were preserved; instalments, interest, and residual purchase terms did not convert it into a loan or advance, so statutory protection was unavailable. en-us Wed, 21 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 18:22:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109100 Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act does not automatically stay proceedings against a guarantor merely because the industrial company is before BIFR; the protection extends only where the guarantee relates to a loan or advance granted to the industrial company, so the suit against the guarantor continued. A transaction described as lease finance was held to be a genuine lease where ownership stayed with the lessor, the lessee had only lease rights, and repossession rights on default were preserved; instalments, interest, and residual purchase terms did not convert it into a loan or advance, so statutory protection was unavailable. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 21 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109100