https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786329 Section 33(5) of the insolvency legislation does not apply to suits instituted before liquidation, and the liquidator may be impleaded and may defend pending proceedings under his statutory powers; therefore the statutory bar on civil courts under the insolvency code (section 63) was not attracted to a pre-liquidation wage recovery suit and the trial court erred in holding it lacked jurisdiction. Priority under section 53 gives 24 months of workmen dues precedence but does not extinguish wages beyond that period nor bar civil adjudication of excess claims. The trial court's refusal to permit impleadment and its maintainability ruling were set aside. en-us Thu, 05 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Feb 2026 09:36:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786329 Section 33(5) of the insolvency legislation does not apply to suits instituted before liquidation, and the liquidator may be impleaded and may defend pending proceedings under his statutory powers; therefore the statutory bar on civil courts under the insolvency code (section 63) was not attracted to a pre-liquidation wage recovery suit and the trial court erred in holding it lacked jurisdiction. Priority under section 53 gives 24 months of workmen dues precedence but does not extinguish wages beyond that period nor bar civil adjudication of excess claims. The trial court's refusal to permit impleadment and its maintainability ruling were set aside. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 05 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786329