Broad reading of heirs and legal representatives under company contributory liability upheld; one liable heir may be listed despite others

Under section 160 of the Companies Act, the heirs and legal representatives of a deceased contributory are treated in a broad succession-based sense, so liability is not confined to immediate heirs or first-line representatives. The Court held that the statutory scheme makes such persons contributories themselves, and the wider reading of the expression supports continuation of liability through the deceased estate. At the enrolment stage, the presence of other equally liable heirs does not prevent one liable heir from being entered on the list of contributories; any further questions of shared liability go to enforcement, not validity of inclusion. The applicant's challenge to removal from the list therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the expression "heirs and legal representatives" in section 160 of the Companies Act is confined to the immediate heirs or legal representatives of the deceased contributory. (ii) Whether one of several heirs or legal representatives can be placed on the list of contributories at the stage of enrolment.

Issue (i): Whether the expression "heirs and legal representatives" in section 160 of the Companies Act is confined to the immediate heirs or legal representatives of the deceased contributory.

Analysis: The statutory scheme treats every person liable to contribute to the assets of the company as a contributory, and section 160(1) makes the heirs and legal representatives of a deceased contributory themselves contributories. The expression "heirs and legal representatives" was read in a broad sense, and the provisions of the Companies Act supported the view that liability passes through successive representatives of the deceased estate rather than stopping with the first line of succession.

Conclusion: The expression was not confined to immediate heirs or legal representatives; it included the heirs and legal representatives in the wider sense, against the applicant.

Issue (ii): Whether one of several heirs or legal representatives can be placed on the list of contributories at the stage of enrolment.

Analysis: The Court held that the present stage concerned only whether the applicant's name was properly entered on the list of contributories. The possible liability of other heirs or legal representatives was treated as a matter going to enforcement, not to the validity of inclusion on the list. The presence of other equally liable persons did not prevent the applicant from being listed as a contributory.

Conclusion: Yes. The applicant could properly be placed on the list of contributories notwithstanding that other heirs or legal representatives might also be liable, against the applicant.

Final Conclusion: The application to remove the applicant's name from the list of contributories failed, and the inclusion of his name was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Under section 160 of the Companies Act, the heirs and legal representatives of a deceased contributory become contributories in a broad succession-based sense, and the inclusion of one liable heir on the list of contributories is not defeated at the listing stage by the possible liability of other heirs.

---