https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97333 A receiver and manager appointed by debenture holders was not a "manager" or "officer" of the company for the purposes of the misfeasance provision, because he acted mainly for the debenture holders to realise their security and only incidentally exercised management powers. The section was confined to wrongful conduct by company officers amounting to breach of duty, misfeasance, breach of trust, or misapplication of assets, so mere negligence, discontinuance of business, or alleged errors in compensation applications did not suffice. As to the liquidator, the proposed claims lacked a sufficient real interest and would have introduced new allegations and limitation issues. Proceedings under the section were therefore not maintainable against either party, and amendment was refused. en-us Tue, 21 Jun 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97333 A receiver and manager appointed by debenture holders was not a "manager" or "officer" of the company for the purposes of the misfeasance provision, because he acted mainly for the debenture holders to realise their security and only incidentally exercised management powers. The section was confined to wrongful conduct by company officers amounting to breach of duty, misfeasance, breach of trust, or misapplication of assets, so mere negligence, discontinuance of business, or alleged errors in compensation applications did not suffice. As to the liquidator, the proposed claims lacked a sufficient real interest and would have introduced new allegations and limitation issues. Proceedings under the section were therefore not maintainable against either party, and amendment was refused. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 21 Jun 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97333