SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(Cal) 13

BIJAYESH MUKHERJI
EASTERN COAL CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
SUNIL KUMAR ROY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
DWIPANKAR GHOSE, M.M.SEN, S.K.KAPOOR, Shankar Ghosh

BIJAYESH MUKHERJI, J.

( 1 ) BY this application the plaintiff, the Eastern Coal Co. , Ltd. , asks for amendment of the plaint presented and admitted on July 10, 1956.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff company went into a members' voluntary liquidation on June 26, 1958. And the amendment asked for seeks to incorporate that only, in the plaint, in suitable terms.

( 3 ) THE first attempt to defeat such amendment is rested on section 446 of the Companies Act, 1 of 1956, by which, amongst other things, all proceedings that pend in a court other than the Company Court, have got to be transferred to the Company Court, when a winding-up order has been made. When, however, it is pointed out that what bulks large here is a case of members' voluntary winding-up, not a winding-up by the Court or subject to the supervision of the Court, and that section 489 does not list section 446 as one of the sections applicable to a members' voluntary winding-up, the attempt is given up, it being conceded that section 446 is irrelevant in the context. Indeed, occurring as it does under the Company Act's Part VII, Chapter II captioned 'winding-up by Court,' it can, without more, do no duty here: a case of voluntary wi





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top