Conditional recall of a winding up order binds parties to reimburse security expenses until the court's terms are modified or set aside.

A conditional recall of a winding up order remained binding where the recall was granted on terms that the company assets stay in the Official Liquidator's custody and security expenses be borne by the non-applicants. The court treated vague allegations of depletion, theft, or poor premises as insufficient because they were unsupported by particulars and raised belatedly. As the conditional order had not been modified, vacated, or set aside, the obligation to reimburse the Official Liquidator continued, and non-compliance justified prima facie contempt proceedings and notice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the non-applicants were bound to reimburse the Official Liquidator for security expenses incurred in relation to the company assets, and whether their failure to comply with the conditional recall order justified contempt proceedings.

Analysis: The recall of the winding up order was granted on the specific condition that the company assets would remain in the custody of the Official Liquidator and that the expenses for securing those assets would be borne by the non-applicants. The alleged depletion of material and complaints about the condition of the premises were held to be vague, unsupported by particulars, and not raised in time. The Court found that the conditional order dated 5.8.2010 remained operative and had not been modified, vacated, or set aside, so the obligation to reimburse the Official Liquidator continued. Mere allegations of theft or unsatisfactory security were insufficient to defeat compliance with the court-imposed condition.

Conclusion: The non-applicants were held liable to pay the outstanding security expenses with interest, and their conduct was found prima facie contumacious, warranting notice in contempt.

Final Conclusion: The application succeeded, and the conditional obligations attached to recall of the winding up order were enforced against the non-applicants.

Ratio Decidendi: A party obtaining recall of a winding up order subject to a condition must comply with the condition until it is modified or set aside, and unparticularised allegations cannot defeat liability to reimburse court-directed security expenses.

---