TMI Blog1949 (2) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treet Branch. A sum of Rs. 445-14 has since accrued as interest on the said deposit. As the promoters of the company found it difficult to commence business of the company, at a meeting held on 10th March, 1947, it was resolved that the share money received from the applicants should be refunded in full to the respective applicants. It was also resolved that the Central Bank of India be requested to honour the cheques in respect of such refund by debiting the current account of the company. The Central Bank of India, however, did not agree to pay. On 28th April, 1947, the Registrar, Joint Stock Company, issued notice under section 247 of the Indian Companies Act for striking out the name of the company from the register and on 18th Sept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rm carrying on business at 22, Canning Street, claiming a sum of Rs. 7,913-5-3. As the affidavit did not disclose sufficient materials, I gave directions for the filing of a further affidavit in compliance with which a fresh affidavit has been filed by Rati Lal. It appears from the affidavit that Sharada Agencies is a partnership firm and they were appointed the managing agents by the articles of association of the company for a period of twenty years from the date of incorporation at a monthly allowance of Rs. 2,000 in addition to a commission on the annual net profits of the company. It is claimed that the said firm paid Rs. 4,008-11-3 under the directions of the company's directors on account of the expenses incidental to the formation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 908] 2 Ch. 300 under the corresponding section of the English Act that the section applied to all contracts of a company, whether preliminary or final or in the course of carrying on its business. In that case, one Mr. Jenkins bought some furniture for 240 and put it into an office which he took for the company. He claimed the money. The claim was disallowed as the company had never become entitled to commence business. Buckley, J., said as follows: "How does he claim? Obviously in contract; he claims upon this ground that, expressly or by implication, the company promised to pay him for the furniture if he would pay the furniture dealer for it. Of course, that is contract. The Act of Parliament says that that contract is not bin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Company Limited [1906] 2 Ch. 435 . This judgment, however, was overruled in In re, National Motor Mail-Coach Company Limited [1908] 2 Ch. 515 where Cozens-Hardy, M.R., observed as follows: "I need hardly say that any opinion expressed by Buckley, J., especially upon this branch of the law, deserves the greatest respect, but I cannot concur in the view which he took, and Mr. Eustace Smith confessed that he had not been able to find any other authority differentiating between a statutory liability and any other liability in relation to this question. There is no other ground upon which the judgment can be supported, and I know of no principle or authority on which that distinction can be maintained." The result is that the claim of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
