Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the legal heirs of a deceased petitioner in a company petition under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 could be impleaded as legal representatives to continue the proceeding, and whether a succession certificate was a precondition for such substitution.
Analysis: The proceeding was treated as analogous to a winding-up petition, in which substitution is permissible under the Companies (Court) Rules when the original petitioner ceases to prosecute. The right to prosecute or defend a surviving claim was considered to pass to the deceased petitioner's estate under section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and the applicants, being the widow and children, were held competent to represent that estate. The Court further held that sections 212, 213, 214 and 370 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 did not require a succession certificate before impleadment in these circumstances. The fact that the matter had earlier been consigned to the record room did not amount to a final disposal of the petition.
Conclusion: The legal heirs were entitled to be impleaded as legal representatives and to prosecute the petition without first obtaining a succession certificate.