2003 (7) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 151 Cr.PC. by Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Delhi in execution case Nos. 370 of 1997 filed by Dr. Kirti Malviya, 554 of 1992 filed by Ram Narain Yadav, 158 of 1994 filed by Ashish Midha, 256 of 1994 filed by Raman Singh and 255 of 1994 filed by Abdur Shafi decree holders/ respondents. 2. Aforesaid order would show that petitioner was directed to refund the amount(s) as detailed in final order(s) passed in the complaints and as it did not refund the amounts, the respondent filed said execution applications under section 27/25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act'). Petitioner filed application under section 151 Cr.PC. seeking stay of execution applications under section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Compani....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e submission advanced by Shri Ram Prakash Gupta for respondents was that the proceedings under section 27 are criminal in nature, and, therefore, the provisions contained in section 22 SICA would not be attracted. Brief notes of submissions have also been filed on behalf of the parties. Section 22(1) SICA which is material, reads thus:- '(1) Suspension of Legal Proceedings, Contracts, etc. - Where in respect of an industrial company, an inquiry under section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to under section 17 is under preparation or consideration or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation or where an appeal under section 25 relating to an industrial company is pending, then, notwithstanding anything contained in the Companies....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the order, fail to take appropriate action, they are also guilty of disobedience and may be punished. That being so, without examining the issue, whether proceedings under section 27 are of civil or criminal nature, the managing director and/or director of petitioner company cannot escape liability for payment and seek stay of the execution applications invoking said of section 22(1) SICA. 3. As regards later limb of submission referred to above, it may be seen that by the order dated 31-3-2003, BIFR has issued show-cause notice under section 20(1) SICA for hearing objections/suggestions if the petitioner company should be wound up or not. In case, the Board, for reasons to be recorded by it, forms opinion about the winding up of petitio....