Inspection rights in winding-up proceedings cannot be postponed on speculative prejudice to future examinations.

In winding-up proceedings, a contributory's right to inspect documents in the Official Liquidator's custody was upheld, and speculative prejudice to persons yet to be examined was held insufficient to delay compliance. The court stated that a successor judge could not revisit an earlier inspection order merely on the grounds advanced, because the Companies Act did not permit a rehearing in that manner and no proper review application had been made. Once the court had exercised its discretion in favour of inspection, the Official Liquidator could not refuse, postpone, or effectively defeat that order on grounds of convenience.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a successor judge in winding-up proceedings could recall or modify an earlier order permitting inspection of documents in the custody of the Official Liquidator; and (ii) whether the Official Liquidator could refuse or postpone compliance with that inspection order on the ground that inspection might prejudice persons yet to be examined.

Issue (i): Whether a successor judge in winding-up proceedings could recall or modify an earlier order permitting inspection of documents in the custody of the Official Liquidator.

Analysis: Section 202 of the Companies Act did not authorise a re-hearing or appeal on the grounds urged. The Company Law did not exclude the Court's general power of review, but no proper review application had been made, and the Court expressed doubt whether Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure could in any event have been invoked on the facts. The earlier order had been made with the Official Liquidator's presence and consent, and there was no legal basis for the Official Liquidator to sit in judgment on it.

Conclusion: The successor judge could not interfere with the earlier inspection order on the grounds advanced by the Official Liquidator.

Issue (ii): Whether the Official Liquidator could refuse or postpone compliance with the inspection order on the ground that inspection might prejudice persons yet to be examined.

Analysis: Rule 81 of the Rules and Orders of the High Court conferred a right on every contributory to inspect documents in the Official Liquidator's custody. The suggested possibility that information obtained from inspection might be used against directors to be examined under section 196 of the Companies Act did not defeat that right. Section 211 of the Companies Act left the matter to the Court's discretion, and once that discretion had been exercised in favour of inspection, the Official Liquidator could not postpone or defeat compliance according to his own convenience.

Conclusion: The Official Liquidator was bound to comply with the inspection order and could not withhold the documents on the stated ground.

Final Conclusion: The application succeeded, and the inspection order was maintained with a direction to the Official Liquidator to produce the documents for inspection in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Court has exercised its discretion to grant inspection rights in winding-up proceedings, the Official Liquidator cannot refuse, postpone, or effectively review that order on speculative grounds of possible prejudice to future examinations.

---