HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3597 of 2008 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Though served, none appears for the respondent herein. The petitioner herein is the defendant who files this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking to assail the order rejecting an application purported to have been filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, seeking stay of the suit mainly on the ground that the proceedings now are pending before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (for short ‘BIFR’). The undisputed facts are that in a suit filed by the respondent herein as a plaintiff for recovery of the money towards the goods supplied, it has been pointed out that in view of the proceedings before the BIFR, necessarily, the present civil proceedings have to be stayed as contemplated under Section 22 of the said Act. For convenient sake, the said provision is extracted, which reads as under: “Sec.22 (3): Where an enquiry under Section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to in Section 17 is under preparation or during the period of consideration of any scheme under Section 18 or where any such scheme is sanctioned thereunder, for due implementation of scheme, the Board may by order declare with respect to the Sick Industrial Company concerned that the operation of all or any of the contracts, assurances of property, agreements, settlements, awards, standing orders or other instruments in force, to which such sick industrial company is a party or which may be applicable to such sick industrial company immediately before the date of such order, shall remain suspended or that all or any of the rights, privileges, obligations and liabilities accruing or arising thereunder before the said date, shall remain suspended or shall be enforceable with such adaptations and in such manner as may be specified by the Board. Provided that such declaration shall not be made for a period exceeding two years which may be extended by one year at a time so, however, that the total period shall not exceed seven years in the aggregate.” The Court below, by taking into consideration the respective submissions, did not find favour with the petitioner and dismissed the application only on the ground that it is open for the petitioner to approach the very same authority. Hence, the revision petition. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the material brought on record and especially, in view of such categorical provision as provided for under the aforesaid legislation where it contemplates the stay of the proceedings in view of the pendency of the proceedings before the BIFR, the question of proceeding with the civil suit does not arise. Necessarily, the civil suit has to await till after the completion of the proceedings before the BIFR. Therefore, the observation of the Court below that the petitioner has to approach the BIFR is only unsustainable. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. The application filed by the petitioner in I.A.No.1924 of 2007 in O.S.No.98 of 2002 is allowed. There shall be stay of the proceedings in the civil suit in O.S.No.98 of 2002 till after completion of the proceedings before the BIFR and awaiting the orders. No order as to costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J Date: 09th October, 2009 SKM