Leave to sue a company in liquidation may be refused where the suit is vexatious or prejudices the liquidation estate.

Leave to sue a company in liquidation under section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is discretionary and depends on the overall impact of the proposed proceeding on the liquidation estate, creditors, and the winding-up process. The court may refuse leave where the applicant knew of the winding-up, commenced the suit without prior permission, sought relief inconsistent with binding liquidation orders, or appeared to be seeking an ex parte advantage before later approval. On those facts, leave to proceed was refused because the proposed suit was prima facie vexatious, prejudicial to the assets in liquidation, and an abuse of process.

---

---

Issues: Whether leave should be granted under section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 to institute and proceed with a suit against the official liquidator and the company in liquidation.

Analysis: Leave under section 446(2) is discretionary and must be granted only after considering the entire circumstances, including the interests of creditors, preservation of the company's assets, and the effect of the proposed litigation on the liquidation process. The applicant had full knowledge of the winding-up proceedings, had already participated in the liquidation matter, and commenced the suit without prior leave. The suit also sought reliefs inconsistent with binding orders already made in the liquidation proceedings, and the court found the proceedings to be prima facie improper, vexatious, and an attempt to obtain a fait accompli by securing an ex parte order first and seeking retrospective approval later.

Conclusion: Leave to proceed with the suit was rightly refused; the application was rejected as an abuse of the process and as likely to deplete the assets of the company in liquidation.

Final Conclusion: A party seeking to sue a company in liquidation must obtain leave on a bona fide basis, and leave will be refused where the proposed suit is vexatious, inconsistent with binding liquidation orders, or likely to prejudice the administration of the winding up.

Ratio Decidendi: Leave under section 446(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is a discretionary protection that must be denied where the proposed proceeding is prima facie vexatious, prejudicial to the liquidation estate, or an abuse of the process of court.

---