https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288219 Once a reference under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 is registered, coercive proceedings against the industrial company's assets cannot continue without consent of the Board or Appellate Authority. A court cannot direct forcible dispossession through the Court Receiver in the face of section 22, because the mere appointment of a receiver does not place the property in custodia legis; actual possession must first be taken. As possession had not been taken, the defendants remained in control of the property, and the requested coercive step was not maintainable. The proper course was to seek statutory permission before pursuing such relief. en-us Mon, 05 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 May 2020 15:53:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288219 Once a reference under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 is registered, coercive proceedings against the industrial company's assets cannot continue without consent of the Board or Appellate Authority. A court cannot direct forcible dispossession through the Court Receiver in the face of section 22, because the mere appointment of a receiver does not place the property in custodia legis; actual possession must first be taken. As possession had not been taken, the defendants remained in control of the property, and the requested coercive step was not maintainable. The proper course was to seek statutory permission before pursuing such relief. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 05 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288219