Shri v. M/s.Pennar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Shri Gole Petitioners. The Petitioners accused a complaint sections 138 The 141 Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881. challenge Writ Petition complaint ground proceedings section 16 Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1986 pending Petitioner No.1-company concerned before B.I.F.R. The second challenge winding proceedings commenced section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the Petitioner No.1-company.
The Complaint 4th May
1998. reference B.I.F.R. The
1999. In Apex Court reported 2000 Cri.L.J. 1464 (M/s.Kusum 2 : ::: 2 : 2 : Ingots & Alloys Ltd. Securities ltd.), challenge v/s. M/s.Pennar Peterson ground The reference pendency B.I.F.R. cannot entertained. petition winding against Petitioner No.1 a ground interfere. There is no merit in the petition and the same is rejected. Judge. Judge. Judge.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1986 — s. 16; Companies Act, 2013 — s. 434.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 16 Aug 2005. The bench was ABHAY S OKA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.