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

K.D.SHAHI, SURENDRA KUMAR, LUXMI SINGH
SUNDER SINGH RANA – Appellant
Versus
GOVIND RAM – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsels for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Manoj Kohli, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Narender Singh, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.D. Shahi, Chairman—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 25.11.2002 directing the appellant to pay the amount mentioned in the order personally as well as severally.

2. There was one Himadri Group of Companies. Sunder Singh was its Managing Director, Satendra Singh Negi was its Director, Rajendra Singh Chauhan was its Branch Manager. The complainant had made certain deposits. The company ran away along with the money. The complainant Govind Singh Rana filed the complaint.

3. It is a Limited Company registered under the Companies Act. We can only be sorry on the fate of these poor consumers who have deposited the money with these appellants. There is no personal liability in a case of Limited Company of the employees, directors and managing directors. The liability is that of only the Company. It is true that the Company is liable, not its employees. The amount can be recovered from the assets of the Company. It is also pleaded and proved that Sunder Singh Rana had already resigned before the liquidiation of the Company and on its place new Managing Director has been appointed. By that way also the present appellant is not liable because he has been







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