9911796707
TMI Blog1962 (3) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of a court of competent jurisdiction and the official liquidator being in charge of the same, the appeal by the managing director and agent was not properly filed and is not maintainable, the managing director or agent not being competent to file or continue the appeal after the liquidator in a winding up by the court had taken charge of the company. After hearing parties on this preliminary objection we have come to the conclusion that the preliminary objection should succeed. We would, therefore, state the facts so far as they relate to the preliminary objection, and give reasons for the conclusion at which we have arrived. On June 30, 1945, the erstwhile Darbar of Sirmur State in Himachal Pradesh granted a monopoly in favour of H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of various defaults alleged to have been committed by the company. Some correspondence between the company and the representatives of Government then ensued which proved abortive. The company then sought to refer its dispute with the Government to arbitration under paragraph 17 of the agreement and a notice to that effect was served on the Deputy Chief Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh. The Deputy Chief Commissioner refused to take part in the arbitration. The company then appointed one Lala Hari Chand Bhatia of Amritsar as the sole arbitrator. This gentleman proceeded ex parte and on April 26, 1949, made an award which in effect gave the company Rs. 92,000 plus Rs. 800 as damages. On October 25, 1949, the arbitrator presented a petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal to this court. This was refused by the learned Judicial Commissioner who held that after the winding up order had been made and the official liquidator was put in charge of the winding up proceedings, leave to appeal could have been sought only by the directors or by the majority of the contributories of the company and Harcharan Dass was not competent to ask for leave to appeal to this court. The company through Harcharan Dass then moved this court and obtained special leave on December 8, 1958. The legal position seems to us to be quite clear. Under the provisions of section 334, clause (e), of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the managing agent of a company shall be deemed to have vacated his office as such, in all cases, on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 though Harcharan Dass had ceased to be the managing agent under section 33 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
