https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112445 Where secured recovery measures have already been initiated under the securitisation statute, the protective stay under the sick industrial companies regime does not survive and cannot be used to halt winding up-related proceedings. The court treated the reference as abated for that purpose and held the stay application not maintainable. It also held that, absent a winding up order, the company court's bar under the Companies Act had not arisen, so interim restraint on asset sale could be modified to allow recovery action to continue. However, the court retained supervisory control over appropriation and disbursal of sale proceeds until further orders. en-us Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112445 Where secured recovery measures have already been initiated under the securitisation statute, the protective stay under the sick industrial companies regime does not survive and cannot be used to halt winding up-related proceedings. The court treated the reference as abated for that purpose and held the stay application not maintainable. It also held that, absent a winding up order, the company court's bar under the Companies Act had not arisen, so interim restraint on asset sale could be modified to allow recovery action to continue. However, the court retained supervisory control over appropriation and disbursal of sale proceeds until further orders. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112445