B.A. Khan, J.@mdashThe appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated June 26, 1998, passed by the company court in Company Petition No. 22 of 1996 admitting that petition and directing advertisement. The appellant''s short case is that he had approached the BIFR for declaring the company sick on June 22, 1998, and had filed an application in this regard before the company court praying for stay of proceedings u/s 22 of the Sick Industries Act but the court still proceeded to admit the company petition by the impugned order. He has attached a copy of the application along with the memo of appeal.
2. A cursory look at the copy shows that it was filed on June 26, 1998, when the matter came up before the court, Therefore, it remained to be seen whether it was listed before it.
3. The record was summoned. Though it contained the application but there was nothing to show that it was listed before the court.
4. Confronted with this situation, the appellant''s counsel, Shri Mathur, explained that this application was placed before the company court without listing as per some practice but was not considered. He was asked to subscribe an affidavit indicating the circumstances in which this application was placed before the court but he declined and harped on some practice in this court whereby documents and pleadings could be placed before the court bypassing the prescribed procedure in this regard.
5. It does not appear to us a case of non-consideration of the appellant''s application for stay of proceedings. Because no such application was listed before the court on June 26, 1998, which deserved consideration by the court. The court was not obliged to examine or consider the application which did not form a part of its record. Such like application was liable to receive consideration only if it was placed before the court as per prescribed procedure. Needless to emphasise that it was first required to be registered and if found complete in all respects to be listed in the cause list. It could not be brought on the court record otherwise and as such the court was not bound to consider it at all.
6. Resultantly we find no merit in this appeal which is dismissed on preliminary hearing. The appellant can take steps to have his application listed and seek its consideration.
