TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 459X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same value of the plant and machinery which had been seized by the KSFC and sold cannot be considered as an amount which was due to be realized from the Directors for the misfeasance of not accounting for the said amount, when the facts are clear in the instant case. - Application is dismissed - COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 270 OF 2007, COMPANY PETITION NO. 251 OF 1999 - - - Dated:- 28-2-2012 - A.S. BOPANNA, J. K.S. Mahadevan and V. Jayaram for the Applicant. L.M. Ramaiah Gowda for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The Official Liquidator has filed the instant application under Section 543(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 R/w Rule 260 of the Companies (Court) Rules, alleging misfeasance on the part, of the erstwhile Directors of the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is as to whether the first respondent though has remained ex parte could be held liable for misfeasance and whether there could be an order to recover the amount of Rs. 34,08,031/- from the said respondent as claimed in the application, it is no doubt true that in view of the objection statement filed by the second respondent who had appeared, the matter had been set down for evidence and the evidence has been recorded. So far as the first respondent, there is no evidence on her behalf on record, since she has remained absent. Hence, the only evidence that would be relevant for the purpose would be that of P.W.I. viz ., the Assistant in the office of the Official Liquidator who was examined as a witness. In this regard, the evidence is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent herein who was the first respondent in the said proceedings has subsequently rectified the defects in the statement of affairs filed by her has closed the proceedings by order dated 29.06.2006. Therefore, in the said circumstance, the statement of affairs which has been filed by the first respondent subsequently would also be relevant for the purpose though the same has not been marked as a document while tendering the evidence of P.W.I. 6. In this regard, a perusal, of the statement of affairs filed by the first respondent which is made available to this Court would disclose that the value of the realizable assets has been indicated as Nil. No doubt, a question would arise as to whether the said statement is to be accepted by thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
