Court denies appointment of Advocate-Commissioner in winding-up case, directs creditor to Company Court for action.

The court dismissed the application for the appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner in a winding-up case involving a debtor company. The Official Liquidator, appointed by the court, had the authority to manage all assets, and the applicant creditor could not repossess the property without adjudicating all creditors' claims. Legal proceedings against the company required permission from the Company Court post-winding up. The court found the application unjustified, directing the applicant to seek necessary leave from the Company Court for further actions in accordance with the Companies Act.

---

---

Issues:
Appointment of Advocate-Commissioner for property sale in a winding-up case.

Analysis:
The applicant, a creditor of the respondent company, sought the appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner to sell a property and deposit the sale proceeds. However, the respondent company was already wound up by the court, and the Official Liquidator was appointed as the Provisional Liquidator to manage all assets. As per the Companies Act, all assets of the debtor company are deemed to be in the custody of the court from the date of winding up. The winding-up order operates in favor of all creditors, and the applicant, as a creditor, cannot repossess the property without adjudicating the claims of all creditors.

Furthermore, under the Companies Act, no legal proceedings can be commenced or proceeded with against the company without the court's permission after a winding-up order. The applicant needs to obtain leave from the Company Court where the winding-up proceedings are ongoing to proceed further in the matter. Additionally, the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner with powers of a Receiver is not permissible since the Official Liquidator already has the authority to deal with the company's assets and effects.

Considering the legal provisions and the circumstances of the case, the court found that the application for the appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner was not justified and, therefore, dismissed the application. The applicant was directed to obtain the necessary leave from the Company Court to proceed with any actions against the respondent debtor company in accordance with the Companies Act.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the application for the appointment of an Advocate-Commissioner, emphasizing the need for the applicant to obtain the required leave from the Company Court to pursue any further actions against the respondent debtor company in a winding-up scenario.

---