TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (4) TMI 296
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....awala, Arun K.Sharma, Ms. Vandana Sharma, V. Pal Singh, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Sushil Kumar Jain, Vinay Garg, Shri Narain, Sandeep Narain, Ms. Anjali Jha, Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi, Menon A. Deb Kumar, Sudarsh Menon, B.S. Sharma, K.V. Mohan, P.H. Parekh, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Pramod B. Agarwala, Ms. Aparna Bhat, and Ms. P. Ramesh Kumar for the appearing parties. JUDGMENT S. Rajendra Babu, J. - This Court in a set of appeals arising out of certain orders made in a batch of writ petitions by a Division Bench of High Court of Gujarat in Association of Natural Gas Consuming Industries v. Oil and Natural Gas Commission [1983] 24 (2) GLR 1437, examined various aspects of the matter in relation to price fixation and upheld the prices fixed by the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....course of his application raise any pleading regarding the priority of disbursement of sale proceeds or application of sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act; that petitioner No. 1 before us is a labour Association representing the workmen of Shri Ambica Mills Ltd. and petitioner No. 2 is labour Union representing the workmen of Ambica Tubes, a division of Shri Ambica Mills Ltd.; that the workmen of these two establishments have not received wages and employment benefits amounting to more than Rs. 40 crores by their employer Shri Ambica Mills; that on 15.4. 1987 this Court had directed ONGC to supply gas to its consumers subject to the undertaking that they would not charge, encumber or alienate any of their immovable assets without the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r dues, they sought for intervention in the matter. 4. The basic submission made before us is that the review petitioners were not parties to the proceedings before this Court and on the passing of the winding up order on 17.1.1997 the provisions of the Companies Act will come into force and will be effective in the light of the decisions of this Court in UCO Bank v. Official Liquidator, High Court, bombay [1994] 5 SCC 1; Industrial Credits and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. v. Srinivas Agencies [1996] 4 SCC 165; Allahabad Bank v. Canara Bank [2000] 4 SCC 406, and Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation v. Official Liquidator [2000] 7 SCC 291. 5. Shri Raju Ramachandran, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for ONGC ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Official Liquidator to make an application for impleading necessary parties and to furnishing copies to them and the Official Liquidator did not implead any of these parties. Therefore, no negligence can be attributed to the writ petitioners in these cases and, therefore, the order made condoning the delay does not require any reconsideration. 7. It is next contended that inasmuch as mandamus had been issued by this Court as to priority of claims in the matter of payment that mandamus will prevail over any law. This Court examined the plenary powers of this Court arising under Article 142 of the Constitution of India in Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India [1998] 4 SCC 409 and held that: "this Court in exercise of its pow....