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

1950 Supreme(All) 320

MALIK, V. BHARGAVA
VISHWAPAL SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
BRIJENDRAPAL SHARMA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.Kumar, S.C.KHARE, V.D.BHARAGAVA

MALIK, CJ.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Sections 13 and 15, U. P. High Courts Amalgamation. Order, 1948, read with Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Allahabad High Court. An application was filed by Brijendrapal Sharma for the winding up of a company known as Sukh Sancharak Co. , Ltd. The matter came up before the learned Company Judge and the case was heard by him at some length. The learned Judge took the view that it was eminently a case in which the parties should reach some sort of a settlement. He, therefore, granted time upto the first Friday after the vacation, or upto such further date as the Judge exercising company jurisdiction might determine, for a settlement. The caae had, however, been argued at great length. The learned judge, therefore, recorded his findings on the various points raised before him, but he did not pass any winding up order under Section 166, Companies Act. So long as the winding up order is not passed, it cannot be said that the rights of the parties have been finally determined. The relevant portion of the learned Judges order is as follows :

"in the circumstances the order which I propose to make is this--If by the first Friday after the vaca






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