https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327928 Recovery proceedings against a company under sickness and winding-up proceedings are not automatically void where the Official Liquidator has appeared and been heard, and where the applicants were not workmen. The court examined the interaction of the sick industrial company regime, company liquidation provisions, and recovery law, and held that the absence of leave of the Company Court did not by itself require setting aside the DRT judgment on these facts. It also held that the applications could not be entertained because the applicants had not exhausted the statutory appellate remedy against the DRT decree, and no exceptional reason justified bypassing that remedy. The challenge and stay request were therefore rejected. en-us Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 May 2016 09:54:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327928 Recovery proceedings against a company under sickness and winding-up proceedings are not automatically void where the Official Liquidator has appeared and been heard, and where the applicants were not workmen. The court examined the interaction of the sick industrial company regime, company liquidation provisions, and recovery law, and held that the absence of leave of the Company Court did not by itself require setting aside the DRT judgment on these facts. It also held that the applications could not be entertained because the applicants had not exhausted the statutory appellate remedy against the DRT decree, and no exceptional reason justified bypassing that remedy. The challenge and stay request were therefore rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327928