https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111174 A suit confined to a bare declaration concerning a document was held not to attract the bar under section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, because that provision applies to coercive proceedings such as winding up, execution, distress, or recovery of money against an industrial company. The court also held that court fee could not be demanded on the footing of a monetary claim under section 6(4)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 where no consequential relief, money decree, or recovery was sought, even though the document referred to an amount said to be recoverable. The challenge succeeded and the suit was directed to be numbered. en-us Thu, 05 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:08:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111174 A suit confined to a bare declaration concerning a document was held not to attract the bar under section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, because that provision applies to coercive proceedings such as winding up, execution, distress, or recovery of money against an industrial company. The court also held that court fee could not be demanded on the footing of a monetary claim under section 6(4)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 where no consequential relief, money decree, or recovery was sought, even though the document referred to an amount said to be recoverable. The challenge succeeded and the suit was directed to be numbered. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 05 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111174