In Re: M.P. Govindan and Sons (P) Ltd.

High Court Of Kerala 11 Oct 1965 Application No. 435 of 1965 in C. P. 14 of 1964 (1965) 10 KL CK 0024
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Application No. 435 of 1965 in C. P. 14 of 1964

Hon'ble Bench

P.T. Raman Nayar, J

Advocates

K.V. Surianarayana Iyer and C.M. Devan, for the Appellant;

Final Decision

Allowed

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

P.T. Raman Nayar, J.@mdashThe applicant had already entered appearance to support the petition for winding up when the winding up petitioner died. The applicants and the winding up petitioner are all contributories seeking a winding up under the just and equitable clause. The cause of action is one common to all of them and I think that the death of the winding up petitioner is sufficient cause for an order of substitution under rule 101 of the Companies (Court) Rules. In fact it seems to me a stronger cause than the causes specifically mentioned in clauses (1) to (4) of the rule and I think it clearly comes with the "other sufficient cause" of the following clause. Even if this is to be read ejusdem generis with clauses 1 to 4 which provide for cases of default or disability on the part of the original petitioner it would cover the case of death which is the ultimate and most absolute default of disability.

I allow the application.

From The Blog
Supreme Court Clarifies Section 27 Evidence Act: Only “Fact Discovered” Admissible, Not Entire Statement
Nov
19
2025

Court News

Supreme Court Clarifies Section 27 Evidence Act: Only “Fact Discovered” Admissible, Not Entire Statement
Read More
Bar Council of India Defends Rules Allowing Foreign Law Firms in Delhi High Court
Nov
19
2025

Court News

Bar Council of India Defends Rules Allowing Foreign Law Firms in Delhi High Court
Read More