Suppression of material facts and limitation justified recalling leave to sue in a liquidation dispute.

Leave to sue against a company in liquidation and the auction purchaser was liable to be recalled where the claimant had suppressed material facts, including earlier applications, prior orders, and the limited liberty previously granted. The claimant had not challenged orders that had already crystallised the auction purchaser's rights, and the attempted claims for repossession of machinery and invalidation of the mortgage were outside the earlier reserved liberty. The claim was also found to be time-barred on the facts disclosed. The effect was that the leave was withdrawn, and the claimant was confined to pursuing any remedy as an unsecured creditor before the Official Liquidator.

---

---

Issues: Whether leave granted to file a suit against the company in liquidation and the auction purchaser was liable to be recalled on the ground of suppression of material facts, absence of entitlement to sue for repossession, and limitation.

Analysis: The application for leave had been moved without disclosing the earlier applications filed by the claimant, the order passed on those applications, and the limited liberty earlier granted to move again only as a creditor if the claim was shown to be within time. The claimant had also not challenged the earlier orders directing sale of the company's assets and delivery of possession to the auction purchaser, although those orders had crystallised the purchaser's rights. The claim for repossession of machinery and for invalidating the mortgage was held to be beyond the limited liberty earlier reserved, and the claim was further found to be barred by limitation on the facts disclosed. The Court treated the concealment of material facts as sufficient to withdraw the benefit obtained from the court and held that the claimant could only pursue, if at all, its claim as an unsecured creditor before the Official Liquidator.

Conclusion: The leave to file the suit was recalled, and the claimant was confined to proving its claim as an unsecured creditor before the Official Liquidator.

---