SREL INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LTD Vs. HOTLINE GLASS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application, the judgment debtor No. 2, M/s. Hotline Display Devices Ltd. seeks a direction that the present execution petition be discontinued in view of the bar imposed under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act (for short, SICA) and seeks adjournment of the proceedings sine die.

(2.) The applicant states that the Board of Directors of judgment debtor No. 2 in its meeting held on 05.02.2010 resolved that the net worth of the judgment debtor No. 2 company had been eroded, and therefore, a reference be made to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) under Section 15(1) of the SICA. The applicant states that accordingly, it made reference under Section 15(1) of SICA to BIFR. The said reference was registered before BIFR as case No. 6/2010. The applicant has placed on record a copy of the order dated 02.06.2010 passed by the BIFR.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the decree holder/non-applicant has opposed this application, without filing a reply. The submission of learned Counsel for the decree holder is that the bar under Section 22 of SICA cannot be invoked in the facts of the present case. The decree which is sought to be executed by the present execution petition is contained in a consent arbitral award dated 12.03.2007. The arbitral award is founded upon Terms of Settlement arrived at between the parties during the arbitral proceedings. To appreciate the submissions of the parties, it is necessary to set out some of the terms of the Terms of Settlement which forms part of the consent award-decree.