2
ABSTRACT SICK INDUSTRIES CASES 2002 - 2015 SICA, which was enacted in 1985 to tackle the precarious problem of industrial sickness, could not succeed in containing industrial sickness. There was rather an increase in the problem of non-performing assets due to protective shield available against recovery proceedings to the Sick Industrial Companies and some of the Industrial Companies fudged sickness in order to avail the protection from recovery proceedings and avail the concessions available to the sick companies. On the other hand due to the rigid interpretation of the enactment many viable industrial companies remained off the purview of SICA and with non-availability of the requisite support available to the sick industrial companies for their renaissance, the value of their assets depleted. Moreover as BIFR was centralized at New Delhi and dealt with the pressure of cases related to all the sick companies, there has been tremendous delay in dealing with the matters, declaring a Company as a sick Industrial company and eventually to formulate a scheme for the revival of the company. As such SICA could not achieve the objective for which it was established i.e. to contain sickness. The Govt. of India taking into account the gravity of the situation as also to provide pace to industrial growth and removing the stumbling block in a Company’s revival has brought forth the Companies (Second Amendment) Act 2002 which provides for the constitution of National Company Law Tribunal and its Appellate Tribunal which shall deal with the aspect of industrial sickness in addition to other issues pertaining to industrial companies. Through the judicial pronouncements researcher going to critically analyses the legal issues involved in the SICA 2002. And for this project researcher do doctrinal research i.e., going

Company Law Abstract

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

abstract

Citation preview

ABSTRACT SICK INDUSTRIES CASES 2002 - 2015

SICA, which was enacted in 1985 to tackle the precarious problem of industrial sickness, could not succeed in containing industrial sickness. There was rather an increase in the problem of non-performing assets due to protective shield available against recovery proceedings to the Sick Industrial Companies and some of the Industrial Companies fudged sickness in order to avail the protection from recovery proceedings and avail the concessions available to the sick companies. On the other hand due to the rigid interpretation of the enactment many viable industrial companies remained off the purview of SICA and with non-availability of the requisite support available to the sick industrial companies for their renaissance, the value of their assets depleted. Moreover as BIFR was centralized at New Delhi and dealt with the pressure of cases related to all the sick companies, there has been tremendous delay in dealing with the matters, declaring a Company as a sick Industrial company and eventually to formulate a scheme for the revival of the company. As such SICA could not achieve the objective for which it was established i.e. to contain sickness.The Govt. of India taking into account the gravity of the situation as also to provide pace to industrial growth and removing the stumbling block in a Companys revival has brought forth the Companies (Second Amendment) Act 2002 which provides for the constitution of National Company Law Tribunal and its Appellate Tribunal which shall deal with the aspect of industrial sickness in addition to other issues pertaining to industrial companies.Through the judicial pronouncements researcher going to critically analyses the legal issues involved in the SICA 2002. And for this project researcher do doctrinal research i.e., going through books, journals, e-books, e-journals etc., mainly using the library and internet.

Name: Pathivada ManasaRoll no: 201137Class: 8th semester, 5 year BA, LLB (Hons)Damodaram Sanjeevayya National Law University