SATISH CHURN LAW Vs. H K GANGULY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ballygunge Real Property and Building Society Ltd.-hereinafter called the Company-was on January 8, 1958, ordered by the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta to be wound up. On January 18, 1960, the Official Liquidator submitted an application accompanied by a signed statement for an order that the appellant be examined under S. 477 of the Indian Companies Act. 1956. This application was granted ex parte by Mr. Justice G. K. Mitter on January 18, 1960, and the appellant was served with the order to attend the Court on March 22, 1960, for the purpose of being examined concerning the affairs of the Company, and to bring with him and produce at the said time and place the following books and papers, mentioned in Schedule B to the order, viz.,

(2.) The official liquidator submitted that all the available papers in the books with the liquidator will be made available at the time of the examination of the appellant but he - the official liquidator -was not bound to give information in advance about the nature of the enquiry; to do so, he contended, would defeat the purpose of the enquiry. He also submitted that the appellant had no right to claim inspection or to obtain copies of the statement which accompanied the judge's summons dated January 18, 1960.

(3.) Mr. Justice Law rejected the application filed by the appellant, holding that the order dated January 18, 1960, was final and that he had no power to review, modify, alter or vary the same, that the order merely summoning for examination under S. 477 of the Companies Act did not affect a party's rights, there being no charge, no complaint and no allegation against him. The learned judge observed that it was not necessary for the court in the first instance to determine that the person called upon to furnish information actually possessed that information:if the Court has reasons to think, or if even an allegation is made that a certain person is in possession of information which would be of use in the course of winding up, the Court can call upon him to appear in Court and examine him, and that Rules 243 (1) and 243 (2) of Companies (Court) Rules laid down the same procedure as was laid down in, In re, Gold Company Ltd., (1879) 12 Ch D 77 at p. 82 and different from the procedure which was laid down by R. 195 of the Indian Companies Act. 1913. In the view of the learned Judge the statement of the official liquidator on which the order dated January 18, 1960, was made not being on oath or affirmation was not "legal evidence" and did not form part of the proceedings of the Court and the appellant could not demand facility for inspection of the statement or copy thereof.