TANDY V. THE HARMONY HOUSE FURNITURE CO. LTD

• Pages: 21-24

TANDY V. THE HARMONY HOUSE FUNITURE GO. LTD



21

"it is further said that in any event, since the defendants were not sued as rep-

resentatives of the whole of Avvha people, the Judge was wrong in making an

order against the whole of the Awha people. The High Court of Eastern Nige-

ria has no power to direct anybody to defend an action in a representative ca-

5



pacity but it is perfectly plain that the defendants have throughout the whole of

this litigation been fighting the battle of the Awha community and we do not pro-

pose to vary the judgement of the High Court at their instance. If any of the

other people of Awha consider themselves aggrieved by the order of the High

Court, they are persons having a right of appeal under section 117(6)(a) of the

10



Constitution of the Federation aid it is for them to exercise that right if they wish

to obtain a variation in the judgement: of the High Court. The cases of

Anlaby

v. Praetorius

(1888) 20 Q.B.D. 764 and

Hughes v. Justin

[1894] 1 Q.B. 667 on

which Mr. Araka for the appellants relied, are not an authority for saying that a

named defendant may appeal for the purpose of protecting the interests of a

15



third party who has an indeper !dent right of appeal."

TANDY V. THE HARMONY HOUSE FUNITURE

20

CO. LTD

IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT. (CAP.37)

VERTNER W. TANDY



APPELLANT

V

THE HARMONY HOUSE FURNITURE

COMPANY LIMITED.



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 287/1963

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

BRETT,



J.S.C.

TAYLOR,



J.S.C.

BAIRAMIAN,



J.S.C.

35



28th February, 1964

Legislation - Companies Act, s.13 `(e), s.136 - Companies.

40



Petition for winding-up - Insolvency, meaning of - Contested debt.

ISSUE:

1.

What is the meaning of insolvency.

2.

Should a court refuse a petition for winding up an insolvent Company merely

because there is a dispute as to the amount due to the petitioner by the company.

45

FACT:

The appellant and another person had lent £10,000 to the company; he wrote

demanding repayment. The Chairman replied suggesting that the appellant should

find someone to lend the amouni: to, or invest it in the Company to enable it to

repay the loan. On 9-10-62 he and the other lender served the Company with a

50



statutory notice for repayment of the sum, and on 7-11-62 they filed a petition to

wind up the Company, which the trial judge dismissed for reasons which are not

here relevant. At the appeal, the Company denied, not that it owed the petitioners

money, but the precise amount: there was a dispute on whether interest was

25

30