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

1959 Supreme(Cal) 52

A.N.RAY, S.C.LAHIRI
CALCUTTA NATIONAL BANK (IN LIQUIDATION) – Appellant
Versus
ABHOY SINGH SAHELA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMIYA KUMAR BOSE, BHOLANATH SEN, Bonmali Das, R.CHAUDHARY, SUBIMAL ROY

LAHIRI, J.

( 1 ) THREE questions of some importance arise for consideration in this appeal and before I proceed to consider them on merits I must record my grateful appreciation of the ability with which learned Counsel appearing on both sides have presented their respective cases before the Court. The first question is whether an unsecured Creditor of a limited company has any locus standi in a proceeding for extension of time for registration of a mortgage or charge under Section 120 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 as amended by Act XXII of 1936. The second question is whether the Court is competent to extend the time under that section for registration of a mortgage or charge in a case which comes under Section 109-A of the Indian Companies Act of 1913, and if the answer to the second question be in the negative, the third question is whether an order of extension actually made by the Court under Section 120 (as amended by Act XXII of 19s6) in a case which comes under Section 109-A, is a nullity or an illegal order made by irregular assumption of jurisdiction.

( 2 ) THE facts upon which the above questions arise are as follows : on 30-1-1944, one Ranjit Bose entered into an






























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