C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 16964-CII of 2006 and C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 Date of Decision : 29.7.2009 M/s Rampur Engineering Company Ltd. .......... Petitioner Versus Punjab State Electricity Board ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. Alok Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.S. Boparai, Advocate for the respondent. **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 2.6.2006, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Patiala transferring the decree passed in favour of the respondent / plaintiff, to the Court of learned District Judge, Alwar (Rajasthan ) for execution, as the property of the judgment debtor is situated within the jurisdiction of Court at Alwar and not within the jurisdiction of the executing Court. The order passed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Patiala reads as under :- “Counsel for the decree holder has filed an application for transfer of the decree on the allegations that the property of the J.D. is located at Bhiwadi, Distt. Alwar Rajasthan outside the territorial jurisdiction. Since this C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 2 court can neither order attachment of that property nor could issue the sale warrant of the due remaining un-exempted so far, as such, it is fit case in which the decree is required to be transferred to the Distt. Judge, Alwar (Rajasthan) for entrusting the same to the court having the jurisdiction. Therefore, this execution application is ordered to be transferred to the court of Ld. Distt. Judge Alwar for 26/8/06 for further proceedings. Precept be transferred & be sent accordingly. This case file be consigned to records.” The learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the plea, that the proceedings under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions ) Act, 1985 are pending before the learned appellate authority, therefore, in view of Section 22 of the Act the further proceedings before the executing Court are to be stayed. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions ) Act, 1985, reads as under :- “22. Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts, etc. (1) Where in respect of an industrial company, an inquiry under section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to under section 17 is under preparation or consideration or a sanctioned scheme is under implementation or where an appeal under section 25 relating to an industrial company is pending, then, notwithstanding anything contained in the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law or the memorandum and articles of association of the industrial company C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 3 or any other instrument having effect under the said Act or other law, no proceedings for the winding up of the industrial company or for execution, distress or the like against any of the properties of the industrial company or for the appointment of a receiver in respect thereof and no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect of any loans or advance granted to the industrial company shall lie or be proceeded with further, except with the consent of the Board or, as the case may be, the Appellate Authority. (2) Where the management of the sick industrial company is taken over or changed, in pursuance of any scheme sanctioned under section 18, notwithstanding anything contained in the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law or in the memorandum and articles of association of such company or any instrument having effect under the said Act or other law-- (a) it shall not be lawful for the shareholders of such company or any other person to nominate or appoint any person to be a director of the company; (b) no resolution passed at any meeting of the shareholders of such company shall be given effect to unless approved by the Board. (3) Where an inquiry 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 such scheme is sanctioned thereunder, for due C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 4 implementation of the 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. (4) Any declaration made under sub-section (3) with respect to a sick industrial company shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law, the memorandum and articles of association of the company or any instrument having effect under the said Act or other law or any agreement or any decree or order of a court, tribunal, officer or other authority or of any submission, settlement or standing order and accordingly,-- (a) any remedy for the enforcement of any right, privilege, obligation and liability suspended or modified by such C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 5 declaration, and all proceedings relating thereto pending before any court, tribunal, officer or other authority shall remain stayed or be continued subject to such declaration; and (b) on the declaration ceasing to have effect- (i) any right, privilege, obligation or liability so remaining suspended or modified, shall become revived and enforceable as if the declaration had never been made; and (ii) any proceeding so remaining stayed shall be proceeded with, subject to the provisions of any law which may then be in force, from the stage which had been reached when the proceedings became stayed. (5) In computing the period of limitation for the enforcement of any right, privilege, obligation or liability, the period during which it or the remedy for the enforcement thereof remains suspended under this section shall be excluded.” The application is opposed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, wherein it has been argued, that under Section 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure the transferor Court merely transfers the decree, and does not take any proceedings in execution of the decree which are in fact to be taken by the transferee court. This plea of the learned counsel for the respondent cannot be accepted in view of the provisions of Order 21 Rule 26 of the Code of Civil C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 6 Procedure, which read as under :- “26. When Court may stay execution.- (1) The Court to which a decree has been sent for execution shall, upon sufficient cause being shown, stay the execution of such decree for a reasonable time, to enable the judgment-debtor to apply to the Court by which the decree was passed, or to any Court having appellate jurisdiction in respect of the decree or the execution thereof, for an order to stay execution, or any other order relating to the decree or execution which might have been made by such Court of first instance or Appellate Court if execution had been issued thereby, or if application for execution had been made thereto. (2) Where the property or person of the judgment-debtor has been seized under an execution, the Court which issued the execution may order the restitution of such property or the discharge of such person pending the result of the application. (3) Power to require security from or impose conditions upon, judgment- debtor.- Before making an order to stay execution or for the restitution of property or the discharge of the judgment-debtor, the Court shall require such security from, or impose such conditions upon, the judgment-debtor as it thinks fit.” In view of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies C.R. No. 4485 of 2006 7 (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the application moved is to be adjudicated, by the Court at Patiala, and not by the transferee court. In view of position explained above, this revision is disposed of with the direction to the executing Court, to take a decision on the application moved under Section 22 of the the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions ) Act, 1985 and pass order in accordance with, law within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Revision disposed off. 29.7.2009 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) 'sp' JUDGE