Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1936 (5) 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

..... JUDGMENT King, CJ. - This is an appeal against the orders of the Honorable Mr. Justice B.N. Srivastava, dated March 12, 1936, and May 11, 1934. The facts which are necessary for the purposes of this appeal, are that the Lucknow Sugar Works Co., Ltd., which is in liquidation, had dealings with the appellant Bank under the heads of (1) Debenture account on the security of block and machinery, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or to lease out the mills. Most of the money which is now in the hands of the Liquidator is the money realised from the lease of the mills made from year to year. The question to be decided in this appeal is whether the appellants can claim any right to a share in this money and whether the security to which they are entitled can extend to it. The learned Judge by his order dated May 11, 1934, c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r and, therefore, all the money should be paid to it. The income must form part of the security and that as soon as the order of liquidation was made, the securities were crystalized and it must enure for the benefit of the creditor. The security of the appellants as debenture holder is limited to block and machinery, and whether it is a floating security or fixed security, it creates no new righ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... learned Counsel for the appellants, that the learned Counsel for the Judge should not have given priority and ordered payment in full under section 234(1) (i) of the Indian Companies Act to the other creditors whose claim did not fall under section 230 of the Act. It was urged that the intention of this clause could not be to give priority to creditors who could not bring their claims under eithe....