9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 908X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - 6-5-2016 - Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J For The Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate, For The Respondent : Mr. Hemant Sarin, Advocate Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. This petition is filed by the petitioner-company through its Director to challenge the validity of order dated 09.06.2011 passed by the Central Information Commissioner, New Delhi, by which application filed by the petitioner seeking information has been declined on the ground that the relevant record, relating back to the year 1999, had since been destroyed in terms of the retention policy of the Bank, therefore, the CPIO cannot be compelled to produce the same. At the outset, counsel for the respondents has submitted that the present petition is not maintaina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... power is to institute or defend any suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding, civil or criminal, in the name and on behalf of the company, with the sanction of the court. The corresponding provision in the 1913 Act is contained in section 179. It is obvious from the provisions referred to above that on the order of winding up which was made in the present case on December 31, 1957, Harcharan Dass as managing agent ceased to be a managing agent as from the date of the commencement of the winding up and the liquidator who was appointed in the winding up was entitled to institute any legal proceeding in the name and on behalf of the company with the sanction of the court. The learned advocate for the appellant contended before us that thou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quent thereto can be initiated only by the Liquidator on behalf of the Company in view of the provisions contained in Section 457 of the Companies Act and as clarified by the Apex Court in Sirmur Chemical and General Industries Limited v. Union of India another (1962 (32) CC 826). 5. In view of the above legal position, the writ petition filed by the Managing Director representing the Company was not maintainable and for that reason itself, the learned single Judge could not have entertained the writ petition. In view of the aforesaid settled law, there is no reason to proceed further with this case and hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed being not maintainable at the instance of the petitioner. - - TaxTMI - TMITa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
