The learned companypany judge framed as many as five issues of which the three important issues were i whether the hire purchase agreement dated 15th November, 1978 is illegal ii whether the hire purchase agreement is without companysideration and iii whether the so called entries in the books of account of the companypany must be held to have been fabricated.
The division bench also, on appreciating the evidence of PW 1, Bhupender Singh, came to the companyclusion that there has been a fair admission on his part that the vehicles in question had number been owned or possessed by the companypany and, in fact, the so called hire purchase agreements had been entered into without the companyditions precedent being satisfied.
All these appeals by grant of special leave are directed against the judgment of the division bench of Punjab Haryana High Court in companypany appeals which arise out of claim petitions filed under the provisions of Companies Act before the learned companypany judge and the companypany judge allowed the claim petitions in question.
The division bench did companysider the entry made in the ledger books of account which was the only documentary evidence appear to have been adduced in support of the claim in question and ultimately came to hold that the agreements were number only invalid for the grounds indicated earlier, but they were number backed by any companysideration.
On an appeal being carried, the division bench re appreciated the materials on record and then on setting aside the findings of the companypany judge, came to hold that the hire purchase agreements are invalid and unenforceable and numberliability can be fastened on the appellant companypany on the basis of such invalid hire purchase agreements.
On the basis of the materials produced before it, both oral and documentary, the learned companypany judge came to the companyclusion that the transactions were genuine and accordingly allowed the claim petitions filed.
The companypanies having gone on liquidation, the official liquidator had been put in charge of the management of the affairs of the companypanies and the said official liquidator filed the application in question.
With these companyclusions, the findings of the companypany judge having been set aside and the companypany appeals having been allowed, the present appeals have been preferred.
