9911796707
TMI Blog1937 (1) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the letter concludes: If you agree to the above condition, send us a deposit of Rs. 1,000 immediately. Instead of Rs. 1,000, only a sum of Rs. 250 was sent and on the 19th September 1935, the Company by letter intimated to the creditors that it was unable to conclude the agreement for hiring the film. This Rs. 250, it appears from the correspondence and from the books of the Company, was entered into a suspense account to the credit of the Royal Talkies. Applications for payment were made on many occasions but the Company failed to repay this sum. 2. At the date of the winding up order of the Company, there was in the credit of the Company's account at the bank a sum of approximately Rs. 1,100 and there is no evidence before me that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here was never any contract and therefore the moneys paid remained the moneys of the creditor. I have been referred to Official Assignee of Bombay v. Abdul Hajee AIR 1933 Bom 437, a case in which a sum of Rs. 1,000 was paid to a firm subsequently becoming insolvent by way of deposit in contemplation of the payer entering into a service agreement with the payee, the sum paid being the contemplated sum by way of fidelity guarantee. No agreement was ever concluded and in that case it was held by Wadia, J. that the payees were the trustees of the payers in respect of that money. His decision went to appeal and whilst approving of his view it was reversed upon another point which was not argued before the learned Judge in the first instance. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set out by Mr. Justice Sergant in James Roscol (Bolton) Ltd. v. Winder, (1915) 1 Ch 62 cited above apply, i.e. the payer is entitled to look to the recipient up to the amount of money remaining in his hands. The claim of these creditors is the only one of its nature as far, as I have been informed and the sum which they paid into the hands of the Company, namely Rs. 250, apparently being still in the hands of the Company, at the date of the winding up order, in my view they are entitled to be brought within the benefits which Section 229, Companies Act, coupled with the provisions of Section 52(1)(a), Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, affords him. 5. I therefore hold that the sum of Rupees 250 out of the sum of Rs. 1,100 is in the words of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
