LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE LTD. versus SHRI HARCHARAN DAS LOOMBA

Citation: [1964] 2 S.C.R. 231 · Decided: 05-03-1963 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Dismissed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

2 S.C.R. 
SUPREME GOUR T REPORTS 231 
' 
ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE LTD. 
v. 
SHRI HARCHARAN DAS LOOMBA 
(P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, M. HIDAYATULLAH 
and J. C. SHAH JJ.) 
Displaced person-Shares in bank-Statutory right given 
by Act to get partly paid up shares converted into fully paid-up 
shares-Order of Company Judge allowing reduction of capital of 
bank-Whether doctrine of Res judicata 'applicable-" No cause 
for sueh refusal", Meaning of-Displaoed 
Persons 
(Debt8 
Adjustment) Act, 1951 (LXX of 1951), ss. 3, 19 (2), (4), (5). 
The appellant bank ~uffered losses due to the partition of 
India. Its scheme for reduction of capital was approved of by the 
Company Judge subject to the condition that the Bank should 
accept without any pay1nent surrender of ordinary shares on 
which part payment was made from any displaced person 
entitled to relief under s. 19 of the Displaced Persons (Debts 
Adjustn1ent) Art, so as to relieve such person from liability to 
pay the calls made and to be made. A period of two weeks 
was given to displaced person!! to exercise the option. 
•The respondent was a share-holder of the appellant but he 
did not avail himself of the option given by the Company 
Judge. Later on, he asked the appellant bank under s. 19 (2) 
of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act to convert 
his 500 ordinMy shares into 250 fully paid-up shares. 
On the 
bank refusing to comply with the requisition, the respondent 
filed a petition under s. 19(4) of the Act for an order dire:ting 
the bank to convert his 500 partly paid-up shares into 250 
fully paid-up shares. The Tribunal granted the relief prayed 
for to the respondent, It also held that losses suffered by the 
bank and doubtful debts had been accumulating for a long 
time and the bank resorted to the scheme of capital reduction 
only after the passing of the Act of 1951 with a view to deprive 
the displaced share-holders of the benefit under the provisions 
of s. 19 of the Act. This view of the Tribunal was affirmed 
by a single judge and a Division Bench of the Punjab High 
Court. The bank appealed to this Court with special leave. 
Held, that the order directing the bank to convert the 
shares of the respondent into fully paid-up shares must be 
coi;firmed. No goo<! cause had been shown by the bank for 
1963 
March 5 
.. 
0..'-16ok •f 
c ........ "L''· 
•• 
H-'*''" 
tlQ U...I• 
SW./. 
. --... ---. ..,..- .... 
• ...... •'4 • ...__ 
232 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1964] VOL. 
declining to convert th~ partly paid-up shares into fully paid· 
up shares. 
The expression "no cause for such 
r~~f11sal" \Vithin 
the mca_ning of cl. ( 4) must mean "no good rause for ref usaI. ". 
He/4, also that the order of the companyJudg-c sanction· 
ing reduction of capital was not con('lu"Sive and hin<ling and 
could not deprive a displaced person of the right i;ranted by 
Act. 
The order of the Company )u•1ge sanctioning reduction 
of capital was subject lo the pr.wision of s. 19 of the Act. 
A displaced person was not obliged to avail himself of the 
option. 
A displaced person not desiring to avail hi1nself of 
the option given under the order of the Company Judge could 
apply under s. 19 (4). 
The order of the Company Judge was 
valid and binding subject to any order which the Tribunal 
might make in respect of any individual share-holder who 
applied under s. 19 (1). 
CIVIL APPELLATE JuRTSDICTION : Civil Appeal 
No. 300of1961. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment 
and order dated :"lovember 13, 1957, of the Punjab 
High Court at Chandigarh, in 
Letters 
Patent 
Appeal No. 19-D of 1955. 
K. L. Gosain, 0. P. Jfrilhotra and 8. X. Anand, 
for the appellant. 
· 
Bnkshi jfehtab Singh Smvhney, ll. K. /,. Sab-
lu1rwa.l and I. S. Sawhney, for the respondent. 
1963. 
l\.farch 5. 
The Judgment of the Court 
was delivered by 
SRAll J.-Thc Oriental Bank of Commerce 
Ltd. was 
incorporated in February 1943 under the 
Indian Companies Act, 
I!Jl 3. 
The Bank had its 
registered office at Delhi and it opened branches in 
Lahore and in other towns which arc now in 
Pakistan. The capital of the Bank was divided into 
5,97,584 ordinary shares of Rs. 10/- each, and 24,200 
B class ordinary shares of Re. 1/-
each. The paid-
up 
capital 
of the 
Bank as on December 
31, 
HJ(6 was 
approximately 
Rs. 
23 
lakhs: 
/ 
-
2 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
233 
On account 
of 
disturbances 
which 
follow-
ed in the wake of the setting up of the Domi-
nions of India and Pakistan, the Bank 
lost 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.