The case began with the appellants receiving notices from PICUP, demanding repayment of dues as personal guarantors for loans granted to a sick industrial company. The appellants contested the demand, ... citing Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA), arguing that recovery proceedings against them were barred. PICUP rejected their stance and issued recovery certificates. The appellants filed a writ petition, which was dismissed by the High Court on May 23, 2002. The decision of the High Court was then appealed to the Supreme Court, which stayed the recovery certificates pending the outcome of the special leave petitions. The Supreme Court subsequently heard the case and delivered its judgment.