1949 (9) 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

....ere the following: -     Rs. A. P. No. 2. Sobhagmal . . . 10,019 7 0 No. 8 Ahson Hussain Abdullah . . . 1,35,500 0 0 No. 15 Hasanali Abdulali . . . 1,50,000 0 0 No. 19 Sobharamsingh . . . 3,025 6 6             These four claims total . . . 2,98,544 13 6   Thereupon Saran made an application to the Court on the 17th July, 1943, objecting to the above four claims. The application was rejected by the Court on the 2nd December, 1944, on the ground that Saran had no locus standi to apply and therefore his objections could not be considered. The appeal is against this order. First of all we have to see whether Saran has a right of appeal as that was contested.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd or wrongfully affected his title to something." Now a contributory is entitled to share in the division of the assets after all claims and liabilities of the company have been met. If the Rs. 2,98,544 which are challenged here be made available for division among the contributories the sum which Saran will receive will naturally be considerably enhanced, particulary as we find that the total claims listed come to only Rs. 5,92,176-12-0. The action of the liquidator deprives Saran of the right to demand a share in this sum of money. Therefore, according to the definition of "grievance" adopted in these cases Saran is a "person aggrieved" and so has a right to apply under section 183 (5). It is true Saran does not come under Rule 338-A, ....