TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 968X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y respondent was appointed as a director of the Company (in liquidation) with effect from 2-9-2004 and the period to which the alleged misfeasance is said to have committed by the ex-directors relates to earlier period i.e., prior to 2-9-2004 (31-3-1999 to 31-3-2004). Hence, there is no merit in instant application. Accordingly, it stands dismissed - COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 146 OF 2010 IN COMPANY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irection to make good a sum of Rs. 1,68,750. Subsequently, an application came to be filed by Official Liquidator in CA No. 756/2010 seeking for amendment of the application. Same came to be allowed by this court by order dated 22-9-2010. In the amended application, the Official Liquidator sought for a direction against the respondent to make good the loss suffered by the company in liquidation in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would contend that for the alleged period of misfeasance, the respondent was not a director of the company in liquidation. In support of his submission, he would draw the attention of the court to the very same auditor's report relied upon by Official Liquidator at page 3, para 7, wherein it is stated that present respondent was appointed as a Director with effect from 2-9-2004. The Official Liqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... himself in his report dated 7-6-2010. Admittedly respondent herein was appointed as a director of the Company (in liquidation) with effect from 2-9-2004 and the period to which the alleged misfeasance is said to have committed by the ex-directors relates to earlier period i.e. , prior to 2-9-2004 (31-3-1999 to 31-3-2004). Hence, there is no merit in this application. Accordingly, it stands dismi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
