JAYA ROY, PRAKASH TATIA
Inder Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Chhotanagpur Banking Association (in liquidation) through Official Liquidator, Patna – Respondent
Heard learned counsel for the appellants.
2. According to learned counsel for the appellants, in Company petition no. 01 of 1958 (P), winding up order was passed on 21.05.1958 against respondent no.1, Company in liquidation. However, one suit was filed by the plaintiffs father along with four other plaintiffs before the Court of Munsif, Hazaribagh in the year 1971 and proceedings of said suit was stayed by the trial Court in view of the pendency of the Company petition no.1 of 1958 and because of passing of winding up order against the Company in liquidation and because of appointment of Official Liquidator.
3. According to learned counsel for the appellants, in the Company petition no. 01 of 1958 (P), one order was passed, however, the copy of said order is not with the appellants, because of which same plaintiffs filed another suit in Patna High Court in the year 1975 which was registered as Title Suit No. 01 of 1975. Suit No. 01 of 1975 was tagged with the Company petition no. 01 of 1958(P). This suit continued in Patna High Court for a long couple of years, then transferred to Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court.
4. Be that as it may, after transfer of the suit to Ranchi B
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.