TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (8) TMI 345
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....60. The applicant, a co-operative society, seeks an order that plots Nos. 84 and 85 together with the building standing thereon held by the company as a member of the society, be returned to them along with the structures. The Vibro Chemi Machinery Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the company"), was ordered to be wound up by an order of this court dated June 3, 1985. The applicants claim that the company is indebted to them to the extent of Rs. 2,29,708.03 in respect of the outgoings such as taxes. The society has lodged its claim for this amount with the official liquidator on February 5, 1986. Two points are urged by the applicants : (i)The bye-laws of the society* provide that any individual who applies to have himself adjudicat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his disqualification shall not apply." I have translated the Marathi word "isamane" as equivalent to the English word "individual". The bye-law No. 6 has no application to a legal person such as a corporation. The draftsmen of the bye-laws have used the Marathi word "isamane" which necessarily means "by an individual". The bye-law contemplates that the insolvent referred to therein is a natural person and not a legal person like a corporation. This would be clear from another feature of the bye-laws. Bye-law No. 5 sets out persons eligible for membership. They are : "individuals", "private companies", "partnership firm", "cooperative societies" and "the State Government". "Individual" is specified in contradistinction to "company". Theref....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f without the consent of the society. Consider the two decisions against the background of these facts. In Ravindra Ishwardas Sethna's case (supra) the company had its office in the premises held on lease. Therefore, there was no question of the company having a saleable interest in the property which could fetch a price. Having regard to the Bombay Rent Act, the company which was a tenant had no transferable interest. The business of the company was in floating prize chits schemes. The official liquidator entered into a caretaker's agreement with an outsider and handed over possession of the premises to him. The Supreme Court held that since the official liquidator was not c-arrying on the business of the company, he could not, under sect....