9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (8) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. U.N. Bhandari and L.L. Jain for the Respondent. JUDGMENT 1. In the present matter ex parte orders were passed on 16-1-1987, and Vishnu Kumar Pradhan, Vishwambhar Dayal Pansari, Deokinandan Garg and Shankarlal Chaturvedi were held responsible for misfeasance for a sum of Rs. 35,502.42 jointly and severally. An application to set aside the ex parte order was moved and the prayer was accepted in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prasad Gupta was also filed. The official liquidator was offered to be cross-examined by the learned counsel for the respondents on 29-7-1994, on which date Mr. Jain appearing on behalf of the respondents had declined to cross-examine him. Therefore, the matter was listed for final arguments. 3. I have heard arguments of the learned counsel for both sides. In accordance with the report of the ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Annexure C has become time-barred due to the failure of the ex-directors of the company. Shri Vishnu Kumar Pradhan remained the director of the company from 3-7-1976, till winding up of the company, i.e., 29-1-1981. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon the affidavit submitted by Bhagwat Prasad in which it is mentioned that the entire affairs were managed by Babulal Gupta. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been produced by the official liquidator by way of affidavit have been perused. The respondents have relied upon the affidavit of Bhagwat Prasad and no counter has been filed to the affidavit of the official liquidator and the said affidavit remains uncontroverted. On the basis of the affidavit filed by the official liquidator it is amply proved that Vishnu Kumar Pradhan is also liable for mis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
