https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98326 Section 151 CPC cannot be used inconsistently with the Code's express scheme. Order XXIX rule 3 allows a court to require the personal appearance of a company director who can answer material questions, even if that director did not sign or verify the pleadings. However, the company's defence cannot be struck off merely because a director disobeys that direction. Corporate liability for such default requires a finding that the company itself caused, procured, or colluded in the non-appearance. On the facts found, no such finding existed, so the striking off was set aside and the suit was directed to proceed according to law. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98326 Section 151 CPC cannot be used inconsistently with the Code's express scheme. Order XXIX rule 3 allows a court to require the personal appearance of a company director who can answer material questions, even if that director did not sign or verify the pleadings. However, the company's defence cannot be struck off merely because a director disobeys that direction. Corporate liability for such default requires a finding that the company itself caused, procured, or colluded in the non-appearance. On the facts found, no such finding existed, so the striking off was set aside and the suit was directed to proceed according to law. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 10 Mar 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98326