1992 (2) TMI 270

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shukla, V.B. Upadhya, Murlidhar, Pradeep Kumar, Ranvijai, S.S. Bhatnagar, N. Sinha and B.K. Saxena for the Respondent. JUDGMENT R.S. Dhavan, J. - Pradeshiya Industries and Investment Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the PICUP") by its application, A-7, seeks leave of this court to proceed with Special Leave Petition No. 3580 of 1987: Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment Corporation ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeared on your behalf. After hearing the submissions, the Hon'ble court has directed that as the winding up proceedings are pending in the Allahabad High Court, proceedings in the Supreme Court could not be heard further. Accordingly, the Hon'ble court was pleased to adjourn the matter to August 21, 1990, and also directed the petitioners to seek leave of the company court in Allahabad if they w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is unusual that, in reference to the context, the company judge may make an order granting leave to a party for approaching the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court made no order in the present case nor has any order been shown to the court that the Supreme Court desires that leave of the company judge be sought before proceeding with the special leave petition filed by the PICUP. The only aspect on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ending in appeal before the Supreme Court or a High Court." There must have been a purpose why Parliament inserted sub-section (4) in section 446. The exception starts operating after an appeal is pending whether before the Supreme Court or the High Court. If any proceeding was pending before the High Court relating to a company against which a winding up order has been passed and, if an appeal....