https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111760 Final decree rights and an execution sale that had already taken place could not be reopened by the High Court after the recovery suit, injunction proceedings, and damages proceedings had attained finality. The claimed protection under section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and section 18FH of the Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951 was held inapplicable on the facts, and revival issues between the industrial unit and government or financial agencies could not be used to nullify the decree-holder's vested rights. Interference with the execution proceedings and setting aside the sale was therefore unwarranted, and the Bank's rights under the final decree were upheld. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111760 Final decree rights and an execution sale that had already taken place could not be reopened by the High Court after the recovery suit, injunction proceedings, and damages proceedings had attained finality. The claimed protection under section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and section 18FH of the Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951 was held inapplicable on the facts, and revival issues between the industrial unit and government or financial agencies could not be used to nullify the decree-holder's vested rights. Interference with the execution proceedings and setting aside the sale was therefore unwarranted, and the Bank's rights under the final decree were upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111760