Appealability of Interim Examination Orders: not a judgment when no adjudication of rights, so appeal incompetent.

Whether an order under s.195 Companies Act, 1913 directing examination of directors is appealable under Clause 15, Letters Patent read with s.202 was decided by applying the principle that only orders amounting to a 'judgment'-i.e., those adjudicating rights or liabilities-are appealable; the impugned order merely recorded that the liquidator had a prima facie case and directed examinations without determining any right or liability, and therefore did not qualify as a 'judgment' and falls outside the appeal scope of s.202, rendering the appeal incompetent.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order dated 17th November 1926 made under Section 195 of the Companies Act, 1913 is an appealable "judgment" within the meaning of Clause 15, Letters Patent as read with Section 202 of the Companies Act, 1913.

Analysis: Section 202 provides that re-hearings and appeals in winding up proceedings are to be had in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as appeals in the Court's ordinary jurisdiction. Clause 15, Letters Patent, as interpreted in this Court's authorities, requires that an order or decision must amount to a "judgment"-entailing a determination of a right or liability-to qualify for appeal under the said provision. The impugned order directed examination of two directors and recorded that the liquidator had made out a prima facie case for eliciting information; it did not adjudicate or determine any right or liability of the persons examined. Consequently, the order does not satisfy the Clause 15 requirement of being a "judgment" and therefore does not fall within the appealability scope of Section 202.

Conclusion: The order dated 17th November 1926 is not a "judgment" within Clause 15, Letters Patent and is not appealable under Section 202 of the Companies Act, 1913; the appeal is incompetent and is dismissed (resulting against the appellant).

---