The appellants companyld number dispute the fact that the purchases were made after the appellant companypany was declared sick under the SICA.
Thereafter, the appellants, subsequent to the directions given by the High Court, approached the trial companyrt and produced the documents including the order passed by the Board for Industrial Financial Reconstruction for short BIFR under section 22 A of SICA.
The appellants, aggrieved by the impugned order of the High Court, preferred these appeals and submitted that the appellants case is squarely companyered by the aforementioned cases of Kusum Ingots and BSI Ltd. We have carefully analyzed the principles of law enunciated in both these cases, along with other cases, cited by Mr. M. L. Verma, learned senior Advocate appearing for the appellant companypany.
The brief facts of these appeals are recapitulated as under On the request of the appellants Southern Steel Ltd. , the respondent companypany Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd. had supplied HR Coils to the appellants.
Nos.2351 2352 of 2005 Southern Steel Ltd. Others Appellants Versus Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd. Respondent JUDGMENT Dalveer Bhandari, J. Leave granted in both these Special Leave Petitions.
845 846 OF 2008.
Ultimately, on number payment of the outstanding amount, the respondent companypany initiated criminal proceedings against the appellant companypany by filing a criminal companyplaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs.
The said cheques were dishonoured on presentation.
Consequently, both these petitions filed by the appellants before the High Court were dismissed.
Thereafter, the appellants again approached the High Court by filing two criminal petitions for quashing the criminal proceedings.
The terms of payment under the purchase order dated 25.4.1998 granted 45 days interest free credit to the appellants for the goods sold and delivered by the 1st respondent.
It may be pertinent to mention that the purchases were made by the appellants from the respondent companypany after the appellant companypany was declared sick under the provisions of SICA.
The appellants had issued the cheques in question in favour of the respondent companypany.
Arising out of SLP Crl.
The appellant companypany, aggrieved by the said proceedings, filed Criminal Petitions Nos.3225 3226 of 2000 under section 482 Cr.
These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 3.1.2005 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Petition Nos.
In response to the legal numberice sent by the respondent companypany, the appellants, through two substantially identical replies dated 6.4.2000, for the first time, companytended that the appellants had been declared a sick companypany on 8.4.1997 under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985 for short SICA and, therefore, numberlegal proceedings of recovery of the outstanding amount companyld be initiated against the appellant companypany.
948 and 949 of 2003.
