The Beginning: Metal Box India
Metal Box India Ltd. was incorporated in 1933 in Calcutta (now Kolkata) as The Metal Box Co. India Ltd. Its principal business was manufacturing metal containers and closures (tin cans for food and aerosols), flexible packaging, paper products, hardware, and engineering products. The company initially operated as an Indian arm of the British Metal Box Company with significant overseas participation and expertise in metal packaging. Over time it diversified its product lines, including bottle closures, industrial extrusions, and related equipment. Moneycontrol
In the early decades, Metal Box India was a recognised industrial name in Calcutta and beyond, leveraging colonial networks and industrial skills in metal packaging—a key input for consumer goods, processed foods, and industrial products.
Structural and Operational Pressures by the 1970s–1980s
1. Rising Production Costs and Material Shortages
By the 1980s, Metal Box India faced growing challenges from rising input costs and supply disruptions. Specifically, the packaging business was hit by shortages of imported tinplate, which was a principal raw material for its metal cans. These shortages increased production costs significantly. Degraded margins were compounded by inefficient power supply and infrastructure problems, which were widespread in West Bengal’s industrial landscape at the time. Moneycontrol
2. Labour Issues and Unrest
The company also experienced labour unrest, with strikes and go-slows affecting productivity in multiple facilities (e.g., Cochin, Mumbai, Chennai, Calcutta). Labour disputes at Metal Box—part of broader industrial conflict in key manufacturing centres in and beyond West Bengal—eroded operational reliability and increased cost burdens. Moneycontrol
3. Diversification and Management Strain
According to contemporary reports, Metal Box India’s senior management faced leadership crises in the mid-1980s, with several top executives resigning during a period when the firm was trying to navigate a tougher competitive and cost environment. India Today
4. Business Diversions and Loss-making Ventures
In the late 1980s, the company’s strategic moves—such as ventures into non-core areas like ball-bearings—added to its financial strain because these businesses were capital-intensive and did not generate anticipated returns. India Today
Referral to Sick Industrial Companies and Shutdown of Units (Late 1980s–1990s)
By 1987, Metal Box India was formally classified under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act (1985), the Indian law used to identify financially distressed firms. This indicated that the company’s accumulated losses and financial stress had reached a level requiring formal rehabilitation assistance. Moneycontrol
By 1989, several of its units had become inoperative:
-
The Faridabad plant
-
Both Calcutta units
-
Unit No. 2
-
The Cochin and Worli divisions
Metal Box’s subsidiary in plastics (Kosmek Plastics Manufacturing) had also entered liquidation, underscoring broader operational weaknesses. Moneycontrol
1990s: Continued Decline, Land Sales and Rehabilitation Efforts
By 1990, only a few units were being restarted in phased rotations, but the company’s financial situation remained weak. Some attempts were made to set up new facilities (e.g., a proposed PVC bottle plant at Kandla), yet these plans did not restore the company to its previous scale of operations. Moneycontrol
In 1996, a scheme of rehabilitation was sanctioned that envisioned closure or rationalisation of unviable operations and selling off surplus assets. As part of this process, the company’s valuable land in Mumbai’s Worli area was proposed to be sold to raise funds for rehabilitation. Trendlyne.com
By 2000, the old Metal Box India entity had effectively ceased industrial operations, and legal actions—including attempts by state governments to attach property for unpaid taxes—illustrated the company’s closure and unresolved liabilities. Telegraph India
Why Metal Box India Declined — Key Causes
The decline of Metal Box India was not due to a single dramatic incident but rather a combination of structural, operational, and market factors that unfolded over decades:
1. Structural Cost Disadvantages
-
Imported raw material shortages and costs (tinplate) eroded manufacturing margins, especially in a capital‐intensive industry. Moneycontrol
-
Production in India became less competitive compared with firms that could source materials more efficiently or locate in regions with better infrastructure.
2. Labour and Operational Inefficiencies
-
Prolonged strikes and slowdowns reduced output and increased unit costs. Moneycontrol
-
Wider industrial labour disputes in key manufacturing states contributed to unpredictability of operations.
3. Diversification Missteps
-
Moves into unrelated or poorly performing business lines (e.g., bearings) increased financial stress at a time when core packaging operations were already under pressure. India Today
4. Inadequate Modernisation
-
Although modernisation plans were discussed, they were late and underfunded relative to competitors. Moneycontrol
5. Financial Distress and Lack of Turnaround
-
Referral to BIFR highlighted that Metal Box India’s financial losses were persistent and not easily reversible. Moneycontrol
-
Rehabilitation efforts were insufficient to restore competitiveness.
6. Real Estate and Asset Liquidation
-
The eventual sale of prime industrial land (e.g., Worli property) was symptomatic of a shift from manufacturing business to asset realisation to satisfy financial liabilities. Telegraph India
Comments