9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (4) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3, 1954. The relevant facts are these: On December 31, 1953, the former management of the company executed in favour of the appellants and several other persons a debenture trust deed for rupees fifteen lakhs ; the immovable property of the company and its fixtures including machinery were given as security. On June 24, 1954, the management of the company executed an unattested deed of hypothecation to the tune of rupees ten lakhs in favour of the second appellant; the movables of the company were hypothecated under this deed. Some time in July, 1954, the debenture trustees proceeded to enforce the security and appointed the first appellant as receiver on their behalf. The receiver took possession of the entire property of the company and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... single judge was also dismissed summarily but with certain observations. Referring to the contention raised on behalf of the appellants that the debenture trust deed could not be challenged by the liquidators at this stage, the learned judges observed that it was not clear from the trial court's order whether a finding on that point was invited, and directed the district judge that if the question was raised he should allow the appellants to argue that the sale effected by the appellants could not be challenged in the liquidation proceedings. The High Court overruled the other contention that the application made by the liquidators asking the court to exercise its powers under section 195 was mala fide. The learned judges observed that on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter it has made a winding-up order, summon before it persons whom it thinks capable of giving such information. It cannot be said, in the circumstances outlined above, that the discretion was arbitrarily or capriciously exercised. On behalf of the appellants a prayer was made that in any event we should ask the court to determine the questions it proposed to ask the appellants before their examination started. We do not think that this is possible. The matter is in the discretion of the court that has the control of the winding-up and it is for that court only to define the area of examination and decide what would be the necessary questions for the appellants to answer. Of course, the court will not allow the powers under the section to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
