TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1940 (11) TMI 24
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that decree, making the Company, of course, a respondent. On March 1, 1940, the Company was ordered to be wound up by the Court and an Official Liquidator was appointed. The present application is an application by the appellant to the appeal for the leave of the Court to proceed with his appeal. That involves a consideration of Section 171 of the Indian Companies Act. Section 171 of the Act is in these terms:- "When a winding-up order has been made or a provisional liquidator has been appointed no suit or other legal proceeding shall be proceeded with or commenced against the Company except by leave of the Court, and subject to such terms as the Court may impose." I confess that I should myself have little doubt, upon the ordinary use o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he decree obtained by it in the courts below, a decree which but for the present revision would establish the company's title in the property in dispute. The present revision is a proceeding against the company to defeat that title." Two years later, however, the matter was reconsidered by a Full Bench of the Punjab Chief Court which included the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shadi Lal, as he then was. This Bench, the judgment of which is of course entitled to the greatest respect, took the view that the earlier case to which I have already referred was wrongly decided, although they make a concession to it by admitting that there is prima facie considerable force in the view taken by it. The Full Bench were, however, greatly influenced by a decisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f which no leave of the Company Court whatever was required. The proceeding on foot at the date of the winding-up order was the appeal by the Company and it was open to the Company to go on with that appeal without the leave of the Court. With that introduction it is possible to see what it was that Lord Davey in his speech actually said. He said this :- "............The respondents, that is to say, the company- now object that the present appellants cannot proceed with their appeal without the leave of the Court in Ireland. I am of opinion that the objection cannot be maintained. It was the respondents who themselves proceeded with the action after the winding-up order, by prosecuting their appeal in the Court of Appeal, and when once an ....