Appeal Against BIFR Scheme Not Maintainable After Relief Availed | SC
- Blog|News|Labour & Industrial Laws|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 27 November, 2025

Case Details: Kamani Employees Union vs. Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction [2025] 180 taxmann.com 543 (SC)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- B.V. Nagarathna & R. Mahadevan, JJ.
-
Jawar Raja, Karun Sharma, Ms Aditi Saraswat, Nitai Hinduja, Ms Rajkumari Divyasana, Advs. & Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Aor for the Appellant.
-
J.P. Cama, Rauf Rahim, R. P. Bhatt, Jamshed P Cama, Sr. Advs., S.S Syed, Ali Asghar Rahim, Mohsin Rahim, Ms Tania Tamanna, Ms Bina Madhavan, S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Ms Shruti Sharma, Anand Dilip Landge, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Shrirang B. Varma, Ms Nidhi Sahay, Ritansh Kumar Nand, Himanshu Raj, S. Sukumaran, Anand Sukumar, Bhupesh Kumar Pathak, Mrs Ruche Anand, S.S Sayyid, Ibad Mushtaq, Rauf Rahim, Ms Akanksha Rai, Ms Gurmeet Kaur, Syed Arshad, Advs., Shekhar Kumar, Pranab Kumar Mullick, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Shashank Manish, Ritesh Kumar Chowdhary, Ms Meera Mathur, Brajesh Kumar & Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Aors for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
In the instant case, the Appellant-Union preferred instant appeal against order of High Court upholding order of Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) approving scheme of rehabilitation of Respondent-Company.
Supreme Court Held
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that since appellant-Union had availed liberty reserved by High Court and had approached Adjudicating Authority and there was also an award in favour of workers’ Union, question as to whether scheme which was approved by BIFR and AAIFR as well as upheld by High Court would no longer be a question for consideration by Supreme Court.
Therefore, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the instant appeal was to be disposed of by reserving liberty to appellant to seek all remedies that were available to appellant-Union in terms of impugned order of High Court.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Order of High Court of Judicature at Bombay in WPC-1707-2007, dated 12-08-2009 (para 4) affirmed.
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA