9911796707
TMI Blog1957 (9) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ors. The company, however, assigned its leasehold rights to one of its directors, G.N. Patwardhan, for a consideration of Rs. 8,200. The land is now in the possession of Patwardhan. The company subsequently filed a suit for setting aside the assignment in favour of Patwardhan. This was dismissed. In 1953 an order was made for the winding up of the company and an official liquidator was appointed. He obtained a decree for over Rs. 8,000 against Patwardhan. This decree has not yet been executed. The appellants were paid rent for three years by the liquidator, but it is their case that they have not received rent due to them since 1953. It is also the contention of the appellants that the company has committed several breaches of the condition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtained against an order passed by the District Judge refusing to grant leave to the appellant to proceed with a suit. The question whether an appeal lay against such an order was, however, not raised or decided in this case. A Full Bench of the Lahore High Court held in Sansar Chand v. Punjab Industrial Bank Ltd. [1929] ILR 10 Lah. 806 at 814 on interpretation of the corresponding section 202 of the old Companies Act, that: " ..(it) is wide enough to cover appeals against any order made in the matter of winding up of a company provided such an order finally decides a dispute between the parties or deprives the appellant of a substantial and important right and is not a mere formal or interlocutory order." This decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary by the order for winding up. In dealing with such an application, the court has necessarily to consider the interest of the company and to see that its assets are not wasted in frivolous and unnecessary litigation. An order or decision on such an application is, therefore, clearly an order or decision in the matter of winding up. It is not a mere procedural order for it affects the valuable right to obtain relief by filing a suit. An appeal, therefore, lies against such an order or decision under section 483 of the Act. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the present appeal is maintainable. The next question to be considered is whether this is a fit case in which leave to file a suit against the company should be granted. Mr. Pat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
