https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99273 Misfeasance liability against directors requires specific pleading and proof of dishonest, negligent, or otherwise blameworthy conduct causing identifiable loss. On the facts, the investment in Ryam Sugar Company was treated as a business investment, and the later loss on resale did not itself establish breach of trust. Claims concerning the Mirrless Watson transaction, crushing season loss, advances to related concerns, and alleged non-accounting of cash and sale proceeds lacked reliable primary evidence, while some surviving directors had no active role or joined after the relevant decisions. The official liquidator therefore failed to prove personal liability, and the claim was rejected. en-us Fri, 16 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:40:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99273 Misfeasance liability against directors requires specific pleading and proof of dishonest, negligent, or otherwise blameworthy conduct causing identifiable loss. On the facts, the investment in Ryam Sugar Company was treated as a business investment, and the later loss on resale did not itself establish breach of trust. Claims concerning the Mirrless Watson transaction, crushing season loss, advances to related concerns, and alleged non-accounting of cash and sale proceeds lacked reliable primary evidence, while some surviving directors had no active role or joined after the relevant decisions. The official liquidator therefore failed to prove personal liability, and the claim was rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 16 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99273