Maintainability of appeal fails when challenge targets only the company order and not the separate order dropping proceedings against directors.

An appeal was found not maintainable where the memorandum challenged only the order confirming action against the company, while the grounds also sought penal action against the directors. No appeal had been filed against the order dropping proceedings against the directors, so the challenge could not be effectively entertained in the absence of a proper appeal against that separate order. The result was dismissal of the appeal for want of maintainability.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was maintainable when the challenge was directed only against the order confirming action against the company and no appeal was filed against the order dropping proceedings against the directors.

Analysis: The appeal memorandum showed that the challenge was confined to the company, while the grievance in the grounds sought penal action against the directors as well. Since no appeal had been filed against the directors in respect of whom the proceedings had been dropped, the challenge could not be entertained against an order that did not include them as appellants or respondents in the manner required for effective adjudication.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable and was dismissed.

---