TMI Blog1974 (1) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellants, in A.S. No. 332 of 1973, and one of the legal representatives of the 4th respondent in that application is the appellant in A.S. No. 432 of 1973. In B.C.P. No. 11 of 1960, by an order of a learned judge of this court, dated December 5, 1960, the bank was ordered to be wound up. Misfeasance Application No. 247 of 1963 was made on January 4, 1963, by the liquidator under section 543 of the Companies Act, 1956, read with section 45H of the Banking Companies Act. On April 2, 1965, there was an order on the said application declaring the respondents Nos. 1 and 4 in B.C.P. No. 11 of 1960 (it is unnecessary to notice the others, if any, made liable by the order) as liable for a sum of over Rs. 16,00,000 in respect of the B claim (vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceeded against. On first blush, this strikes us to be a rather extreme proposition. Section 634 of the Companies Act provides that any order made by the court under the Act, may be enforced in the same manner as a decree made by the court, in a suit. Being so, we should have thought the ordinary mode of execution of a decree under the provisions of section 50 and the allied sections of the Civil Procedure Code are open. But counsel for the appellants, drew our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in Official Liquidator, Supreme Bank Ltd. v. P.A. Tendolkar [1973] 43 Comp. Cas.382. There, proceedings under section 543 were started against several directors. The company judge gave his decision on November 8, 1963 ([1964] 34 Comp. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court may, as a matter of justice and equity, drop proceedings against delinquent directors, managers or officers who are no longer alive, leaving the complainant to his ordinary remedy by a civil suit against the assets of the deceased, yet where no injustice may be caused by continuing these proceedings against a past director, even though he be dead, the proceedings could continue after giving persons who may be interested opportunities to be heard. But, even such proceedings can only result in a declaration of the liability of a deceased director, because the language of section 235 of the Act of 1913, as already noticed, does not authorise passing of orders to compel heirs or legal representatives to do anything. Such compulsive proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive liabilities and directions : .............. (5) The directors, Tendolkar and Ajgaonkar, are held jointly and severally liable in case the amount, if any, which, out of the initially separate liability of the managing director, S.K. Samant, that is to say, Rs. 73,500, cannot be recovered from S.K. Samant only. (6) The case is remanded to the learned company judge for passing such orders against the managing director, Samant, and director, Ajgaonkar, under section 23 5 of the Act of 1913, as may be needed for discharging the liabilities determined above, but no such orders will be passed against the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased director, P.A. Tendolkar, under section 235 of the Act of 1913, although their liabiliti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
