- (1.)The Court : This matter is coming up in the list for orders pursuant to the order dated 24th of January, 1994 passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi (here-in-after referred to as "AIFR"). The said appellate authority forwarded its recommendations to this Court by their letter dated 4th of February, 1994. The appellate authority after considering various aspects of the matter held that there was absolutely no substance in the appeal which was accordingly dismissed and the impugned order of the BIFR dated 7th of September, 1992 was confirmed by the said appellate authority.
(2.)By the order dated 7th of September, 1992 the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (here-in-after briefly referred to as BIFR') inter alia held as follows :-
"19. After carefully considering all the facts on record and submissions made at the hearing, the Bench concluded that no agreed scheme to rehabilitate the company was forthcoming. The objections made by the company to the report of the consultant too were not substantively borne out. The points raised by Shri Gupta in regard to projections for miscellaneous realisation, wastage, job/own work, etc. were duly taken in view by the Operative Agency while formulating the rehabilitation scheme and justification thereof was duly explained by its representative in to-day's hearing; the same was found quite satisfactory. The promoters had received the report early in July and, therefore, had adequate time to examine it. Shri Gupta also could not substantiate his statement in regard to the filing of an appeal against the order of the concerned Court in the case of Sanchita Investments. The Bank and creditors are fully in support of the winding up of the company.

20. Having considered all facts, the Bench, therefore, confirmed that it was just and equitable that Shree Bajarang Electric Steel Company Limited should be wound up. The Bench also decided to send its decision to wind up the company to the High Court of Calcutta for necessary action according to law. Copies of this order as well as those of the earlier proceedings should be forwarded to the said High Court".

(3.)My attention was also drawn to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 21st April, 1994 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 12446 of 1992 (Bank of India v. The Commissioner, Sanchita Investment & Anr.). The Supreme Court recorded the submissions of the respective parties inter alia to the effect that in view of the order aforesaid of the AIFR the petitioner could go back to this High Court and raise all such issues as are available to it and the respondent could also raise all such pleas as are available to the respondent before this Court. The Supreme Court also directed the matter to be expedited in this Court.
;