1931 (10) TMI 17

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the list attached to the petition were called upon to make their contributions, but failed to do so; and that the present petition was therefore filed requesting the Court to enforce payment of the same. The petition was resisted by six of the shareholders mentioned in the list referred to above; five of them were represented by Mr. Madan Gopal, Advocate, while the sixth appeared in person. The case proceeded ex parte against the remaining shareholders, who did not appear in spite of service. The petition was resisted by the contesting shareholders on a number of grounds; but after hearing arguments it seems to me that two of them are fatal to the petition, namely, (1) that the appointment of the liquidators was not valid according to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....business could arise. It seems to me, therefore, on the wording of the section that the proper course in the circumstances of the case was to pass a 'special' resolution as required by clause (2) of section 203. However, even assuming that the company could have been wound up by an 'extraordinary' resolution it seems to me that no such resolution was passed in accordance with law. It appears that the notice of the 'extraordinary' resolution, which was given in the present instance, did not state that the resolution was to be passed as an 'extraordinary' resolution (vide clause (1) of section 81 of the Indian Companies Act). The notice, no doubt, stated that the meeting was to be an 'extraordinary' meeting but this did not necessarily imply ....