9911796707
TMI Blog1940 (8) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 43-10-6 and the other of Rs. 700-7-0. The liquidator also asked that an order be passed against the appellant, directing him to produce all books, papers, documents and correspondence relating to the company which were still in his possession. The learned Judge held that the appellant was not liable in the sum of Rs. 3,448-10-6 and the liquidator withdrew the summons so far as Rs. 700-7-0 was concerned. With regard to the books it was said that the appellant had wrongfully retained the following: (1) the inventory or stock-book; (2) the director's circulation book; (3) the share-holders' circulation book; and (4) the share transfer application register. The learned Judge found that the first two of these books were with the appellant, but t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but for compensating the company for the loss suffered. In that case it had not been shown that there was any loss. This interpretation of the section was accepted by the House of Lords in the second case. There is, however, a great difference between Section 165 of the English Companies Act, 1862 and Section 235 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 as amended by Act XXII of 1936.Section 165 of the English Act reads as follows: "Where, in the course of the winding up of any company under this Act, it appears that any past or present director, manager, official, or other liquidator or any officer of such company, has misapplied or retained in his own hands or become liable or accountable for any monies of the company, or been guilty of any m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or, manager, liquidator or officer, and compel him to repay or restore the money or property or any part thereof respectively with interest at such rate as the Court thinks just, or to contribute such sum to the assets of the company by way of compensation in respect of the misapplication, retainer, misfeasance or breach of trust, as the Court thinks just. (2) This section shall apply notwithstanding that the offence is one for which the offender may be criminally responsible." Under this section the Court may compel an officer of a company against whom a misfeasance summons has been taken out (1) to repay the money, or (2) to restore the property, or (3) to pay compensation. The difference between the two sections is that under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
