9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (3) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strial Company Ltd. and also by its chairman, managing director and trustees. This application has been allowed and it is contended before us by the appellant that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter as under the Companies Act, 1956, jurisdiction is vested in the high Court in regard to this matter. It is also urged that the petition is defective in that it does not conform to the relevant rules and forms applicable. Thirdly it was urged that in any view of the matter the transfer of the assets of the Gothuruth Educational and Industrial Company Ltd. (in liquidation), sought by the application cannot be allowed without settling the claims of the appellant. The Gothuruth Educational and Industrial Company Ltd., h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above- mentioned be paid out of the assets of the company, the expenses required for the purpose of forming a new company, as stated above and all other expenses and costs he has to meet for fully and effectively carrying out this scheme". It is clear from the terms of the resolution passed at the meeting which has been accepted by the court by order dated February 15, 1963, that the Gothuruth Educational and Industrial Company Ltd. (in liquidation), is to cease to exist. This being so, it is equally clear that the present application that has been moved is a step in respect of a winding-up of the Gothuruth Educational and Industrial Company Ltd. (in liquidation). In regard to such winding-up, the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that resolution will be with respect to the winding-up of the company and therefore an application under section 153A of the Companies Act, 1913, for implementing such resolution as well as one under section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for the same purpose will be steps-in-aid of the liquidation of the company. It is therefore appealable as an order passed in liquidation. This is what has been held by the Bombay High Court and therefore it is impossible to accept the contention of counsel for the appellant that whenever an application is moved either under section 153A of the Companies Act, 1913, or under section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, it must be understood and treated as an original petition. The second contention raised by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dressed to the petitioner that it was taken to him on more than one occasion. The address given in the cover is the correct address and there is reason to believe that the appellant has been deliberately avoiding service. In the affidavit filed by the appellant in answer to an application, I. A. No. 824 of 1963, he has specifically referred to the order dated June 12, 1963. This is seen from the counter affidavit dated January 24, 1964, in I. A. No. 824 of 1963 Company M. P. No. 1 of 1117 of the District Court. So he was aware of the order dated June 12, 1963, before January 24, 1964. He took no steps to vacate it. Nevertheless, it was urged before us that he was not aware of the order. This conduct of the appellant is reprehensible. The or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
