Shah, J. - (1.)The appellant, Vastulal Pareek--hereinafter referred to as " Vastulal "--started in 1921 at Bikaner a banking business in the name and style of the Pareek Commercial Bank. In 1943 a public limited company was registered under the Bikaner Companies Act called the Pareek Commercial Bank Ltd.--hereinafter called " the bank "--and all the assets and liabilities of the Pareek Commercial Bank were transferred to that public limited company. Under the articles of association of the bank general management of the business was, subject to the control and supervision of the directors, vested in Vastulal who was appointed chairman of the bank. In an application under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, submitted in February, 1952, before the High Court of Rajasthan (which at the material time had acquired, on account of political changes, jurisdiction over the territory of the former Indian State of Bikaner) by one of the depositors of the bank, the High Court passed an order for compulsory winding up and appointed an official liquidator to wind up the affairs of the bank. On examining the books of account of the bank, the liquidator found that in the "cash credit accounts " of six stock brokers stood diverse amounts which aggregated to Rs, 66,821. These amounts had been transferred to the account of those brokers from the "sundries register" of the bank. It was also found that payments had been made in the accounts of those stock brokers in different banks on instructions given by Vastulal on behalf of the bank. In the directors report dated December 31, 1950, under the caption " Loans, advances, cash credits and overdrafts ", certain amounts were collectively described as " debts considered good for which the bank held no other security than the debtors personal security ", that the amount of Rs. 66,821 was the balance due from diverse " parties through whom shares were purchased and sold, but not transacted through share account ", and that the same was " unverified owing to the lack of information ". The explanation given by Vastulal in his public examination under Section 450 of the Banking Companies Act, 1949, about the transfer of amounts to the stock brokers was found unsatisfactory. On enquiry the stock brokers informed the liquidator that the items were credited by them to the account of M/s. B. R. Pareek & Sons Ltd.--a private concern of which Vastulal was the managing director--and the amounts were utilised towards discharge of the liability for payment of losses of that concern in its dealings in shares which had been carried on through them. The liquidator submitted three petitions to the company judge of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur under Section 235 of the Indian Companies Act (7 of 1913) and Section 45H of the Banking Companies Act (10 of 1949), for directions against Vastulal and other directors of the bank that they be ordered to restore the amounts belonging to the bank which had been transferred to the stock brokers and for orders for assessment of damages. It was averred in the petitions that Vastulal had done speculative business in buying and selling shares and securities in the name of M/s. B. R. Pareek & Sons Ltd. through different stock brokers and had suffered heavy losses and that towards payment of or as advance in connection with his personal and private transactions and in any case not in respect of transactions of the bank had got paid large amounts of money through the Imperial Bank of India at Bombay to the brokers and had debited or allowed to be debited the said amounts in the " sundries register " to the account of the brokers and had thereby gained advantage for himself and on that account was guilty of misfeasance, malfeasance and non-feasance. It was also averred that the other directors had rendered themselves liable under Section 235 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, in that, being directors of the bank, they either abetted or connived at the conduct of Vastulal in misapplying the funds belonging to the bank towards payment of his personal losses. The claim against those directors has been dismissed by the High Court and nothing more need be said in that behalf.
(2.)The company judge rejected the plea raised by Vastulal and passed orders in the three petitions that Vastulal do pay to the bank three sums, Rs. 700, Rs. 8,500 and Rs. 24,846-11-0 with interest on each of those sums at six per cent. per annum simple up to the date of realization. Against those orders three appeals were preferred to the High Court being Appeals Nos. 5, 6 and 7 of 1960. Appeal No. 5 of 1960 was held not maintainable and was accordingly dismissed. Appeals Nos. 6 and 7 of 1960 were heard on the merits and were ultimately dismissed by the High Court. Against the orders passed by the High Court these two appeals have been preferred with special leave.
(3.)Appeal No. 484 of 1962 arises out of the order made in Company Case No. 176 of 1957 for payment of Rs. 8,500 which was the amount transferred by Vastulal to M/s. Naraindas Aidan, stock brokers of Bombay, and Appeal No. 485 of 1962 arises out of the order passed in Company Case No. 177 of 1957 for payment of Rs. 24,846-11-0, being the amounts of money and the value of 19 shares of the Kohinoor Mills Ltd. transferred to M/s. S. Ramdas also stock brokers of Bombay. In the " sundries register " of the bank the following are the relevant entries in the accounts of M/s. Naraindas Aidan and M/s. S. Ramdas :
"Account of M/s. Naraindas Aidan page 75

9-12-49 To amount paid by Bank of India, Bombay, on 13-12-49 Dr. 3,500

6-2-50 To amount paid by Imperial Bank of India, Bombay, on 3-2-50 Dr. 5,000

6-12-51 By amount transferred to cash credit account Cr. 8,500"

"Account of M/s. S. Ramdas page 76

23-12-49 To cash paid by Imperial Bank of India, Bombay, on 19-12-49 Dr. 10,000

28-1-50 To cash paid by Imperial Bank of India, Bombay, on 7-1-50 Dr. 2,500

6-5-50 To cash paid by Imperial Bank of India on 22-2-50 Dr. 1,000

6-12-51 By amount transferred to cash credit account Cr. 18,500"