MANILAL BRIJLAL Vs. VANDRAVANDAS CJADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from a decision of the District Judge of Surat, raising a question of practice.

(2.) The appellant is a creditor of the Surat Industrial Mills Co., Ltd., which is in liquidation, and two liquidators were appointed, one Jadav and the other T. J. Mehta. The appellant started proceedings under a 235 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, to make the liquidators liable for certain alleged misfeasances. After the proceedings had been started, the liquidator T. J. Mehta died, and an application was made to the Court for leave to bring on record his widow and son as the persons liable to discharge his debts. The learned Judge dismissed the application, and, in my opinion, he was right in doing so.

(3.) Section 235 of the Indian Companies Act is a procedural section, which is copied from the English Act, and it confers a right on, amongst other persons, a creditor of the company, to apply to the Court to examine into the conduct of various officers, including a liquidator, and compel him to repay or restore money or property of the company which he has misapplied. Although the section is a procedural section in the sense that it does not confer any right to recover moneys or properties which could not otherwise be recovered, it does confer a special right on the creditors and other classes named. Apart from that section it would not be open to the appellant as a creditor to file a suit against the liquidator asking him to make good misfeasances committed against the company, though it would be open to the company itself, with leave of the Court, to recover monies of the company misappropriated.