TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 886
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sting that a scheme be accepted for the running and functioning of the company. The State of West Bengal was the principal shareholder of the company, having more than 40% share, prior to its liquidation and the State has taken steps to ensure that interested parties may apply to fund the further functioning of the company (in liquidation) and take over its debts and liabilities. In the midst of such process, two of the secured creditors of the company (in liquidation), IIBI Limited and IFCI Limited raise a point of order on the basis of a recent judgment of this Court delivered on September 5, 2018 on an appeal arising out of a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 in APO No.112 of 2017 (Prasanta Kumar Mitra vs. India Steam Laundry (P) Limited). According to such secured creditors, in view of the answer to the third issue rendered in such judgment and the expansive manner in which the words "all" and "including" have been interpreted at paragraph 49 of the report, it implies that the company Court in a High Court has no further jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters pertaining to the Companies Act, 1956 or the Companies Act, 2013. It appears from the ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be relevant for the present purpose, however, for the purpose of completeness, it is recorded that the fourth issue was answered at paragraph 57 of the report by holding that Section 68 of the Amending Act of 1988 stood repealed by implication. In addition, to the discussion on the several issues and the conclusions expressed on them, there is a summary of the answers pertaining to the four issues captured at paragraph 59 of the report: "59. In summary, the four main issues are answered as follows: (a) Whether the ouster of the jurisdiction of the High Court in relation to company matters needs to be express or the same may be ousted by implication? The jurisdiction of the High Court in company matters being a special jurisdiction conferred by the 1956 Act, and not being a civil jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the same can always be ousted by the amendment of the enactment that conferred the said jurisdiction. Hence, no express repealing is required and the same can be repealed by implication. (b) Whether parties to a lis can insist on continuing their dispute in the forum the same was initiated or have to bow down to the wishes to the legislature for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the discussion, particularly, the impact of the judgment in India Steam Laundry (P) Limited on the present proceedings. The parties refer first to Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 as amended in 2016. The parties next refer to a notification published by the Union Ministry of Corporate Affairs on December 7, 2016 in accordance with the then sole proviso to Section 434(1)(c) of the Act of 2013. It appears that shortly before the conclusion of the hearing in India Steam Laundry (P) Limited, an Ordinance was promulgated by the publication made in the Official Gazette on June 6, 2018, inter alia, amending Section 434 of the Act of 2013 by incorporating a second proviso to clause (c) of sub-section (1) thereof. It does not appear that such Ordinance was brought to the notice of the Division Bench in course of the India Steam Laundry (P) Limited matter. The Ordinance has now transformed into an Act of Parliament and published in the Official Gazette on August 17, 2018. Section 39 of the Act is the reflection of Section 39 of the Ordinance that preceded it. As a consequence of the amendment to Section 434 of the Act of 2013, first in 2016 and now in 2018, Section 434(1)(c), whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een served on the respondent as required under rule 26 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 shall be transferred to the Bench of the Tribunal established under sub-section (4) of section 419 of the Act, exercising territorial jurisdiction and such petitions shall be treated as applications under sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be, and dealt with in accordance with Part II of the Code. Provided that the petitioner shall submit all information, other than information forming part of the records transferred in accordance with Rule 7, required for admission of the petition under sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be, including details of the proposed insolvency professional to the Tribunal within sixty days from date of this notification, failing which the petition shall abate. (2) All cases where opinion has been forwarded by Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, for winding up of a company to a High Court and where no appeal is pending, the proceedings for winding up initiated under the Act, pursuant to section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 shall continue to be dealt with by such High Court in accordan....