TMI Blog1936 (1) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oached Malik Mukhbain Singh, Barrister-at-law, plaintiff No. 3 and asked him to persuade some influential and rich men of Rawalpindi to become Directors of the Bank and take over its management. During the course of the. negotiations it was represented to the plaintiffs that the Bank had suffered some losses but that these losses will be made good by the Chairman and defendants Nos. 3 to 9, that a sum of Rs. 6,000 had been deposited in the Bank by the directors, and that investments to the extent of Rs. 35,000 had been made by the Bank. As a result of these misrepresentations, each of the plaintiffs and Bhagat Jaswant Singh defendant No. 10, agreed to buy 100 shares of the Bank of the value of Rs. 100 each and also to become its director, p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t they must, therefore, be regarded as its share-holders and Directors. It was also pleaded on behalf of the defendants that a suit for a mere declaration that the plaintiffs are not share-holders or Directors of the Bank was not maintainable. The trial Court decreed the plaintiffs' claim, and as the Bank had gone into voluntary liquidation while the suit was pending in the trial Court, the Voluntary Liquidator and Lala Narinjan Das Chairman of the Bank, have preferred an appeal to this Court. It was contended by Mr. Rustomji on behalf of the appellants that each of the plaintiffs had signed an application for allotment of shares on April 7th, 1931, that these applications had been forwarded to the Bank on April 14, that 100 shares had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the letter, for making good the loss of Rs. 14,000 suffered by the Bank up to April, 1931. (3)Rupees 3,000 were to be paid straight off by the Chair man on account of an additional payment of Rs. 30 per share by the Directors. (4)The fixed deposit of the Directors in the Bank was to be Rs. 6,000 and that was not to be withdrawn. (5)300 shares were to be sold by the Chairman out of the shares that had been forfeited. The reply of the Chairman dated April 18, shows that practically none of the conditions imposed by the letter dated April 14 "had been fulfilled by the Chairman and the Directors up to April 16,1931, when they proceeded to allot shares to the plaintiffs and defendant No. 10 and to appoint them as Directors. It is, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
