TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1935 (6) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the District Judge, Ludhiana, for the payment by the appellants of Rs. 1,650 the amount of a call on shares in the respondent company together with Rs. 924 interest and costs. The appellants were share-holders in the company and a call was made on the 17th; of July, 1928. The shares were forfeited for non-payment of the call on the 15th of February, 1930 and the company went into voluntary liqu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....forced by these proceedings is for the payment of a debt in respect of these calls and that their claim is barred by limitation; and I think that if the liquidator was forced to rely on the debt created by the call on the shares and the forfeiture of them, this argument would prevail. The argument for the liquidator is that his claim is not on foot of the debt, but is for contribution under Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....916] ILR 38 All. 347 where it was said: "We entirely agree with the contention put forward by the appellant's counsel that so far as the recovery of the original debt based upon calls made by the company, which has become time-barred, is concerned, the liquidator has no higher right than the company. The company could not sue for those calls, no more can the liquidator," but it was held, neverthel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r point arises whether the appellants are liable for interest; the learned District Judge has allowed it, applying the provisions of the Articles of Association, and if the debt created by the original call were now being claimed, interest would clearly be payable under the contract; but as the liability is created by Section 156, it must be measured by the terms of that section, which limits the ....