SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Kar) 148

2011 (3) KCCR 2247
High Court of Karnataka
V.G. SABHAHIT & B.V. PINTO
Allam Karibasappa, Bellary & Others
Versus
Singamasetty Venkataramaiah & Others
M.F.A No. 2873 of 2001 C/W M.F.A No. 2706 of 2004
Decided on: 25-02-2011

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:Advocates C.V. Nagesh, Senior Counsel, V.P. Kulkarni, Aditya Sondhi, Holla & Holla, Advocates. S. Sawkar, S. Srirange, Sundarswamy Ramdas Anand, K.C. Arige, S.S. Naganand, Senior Counsel, K.L. Patil, Y. Lakshmikanth Rerddy, S.S. Nagarale, K. Chandrakanth Ariga, Advocates.

Headnote:CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 - Sections 94 & 144 r/w Section 151: [V.G.Sabhahit & B.V.Pinto, JJ] Whether the order for cancellation of the registered Transfer Deed dated 11.03.83., can be sustained? - Held, Since, the estate of the insolvents was vested with the Official Receiver on execution of the said Transfer/Sale Deed, in accordance with the concluded contract, no order for cancellation of the said Deed can be sustained, only to the extent of the share of the son of the deceased.

       INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932 - Sections 4 & 3: [V.G.Sabhahit & B.V.Pinto, JJ] Liability of Partner - Whether the share of a demised partner can be sold to his creditor? - Held, Though the share of a demised partner cannot be sold to an outsider, it can however be sold to his creditor, by the legal heirs of the deceased partner, in the instant case in pursuance to Clause 9 of the Partnership Agreement.

       PROVINCIAL INSOLVENCY ACT, 1920 - Section 37: [V.G.Sabhahit & B.V.Pinto, JJ] Whether the Sale Deed executed by the Official Receiver, would be binding on the heirs - Held, It would be binding only on the son of the deceased having been declared insolvent during his lifetime, who had sold his share of half anna in favour of Allam Karibassapa, a partner in M/s. Gavisiddewara and Company, while Singamasetty Govindamma the wife of the deceased has never made any correspondence nor has offered to sell her part of the share in the one anna share inherited and there is absence of material on record to show that Singamasetty Govindamma had consented to sell her share along with that of her son as aforesaid, though both the son and the wife had inherited to the share of the deceased as Class 1 heirs in terms of Schedule to Section 8 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

JUDGMENT

1. These two appeals arise out of the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Bellary, dated 16.02.2004 passed on I.A. XV in I.C. No.2/75 and Ms. C. No.5/2000, wherein the learned District Judge has allowed the application filed under Sections 144 and 94 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in Ms. C. No.5/2000 with costs and has dismissed the application – I.A. XV filed under Sections 4 and 5 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (for short, is filed by the applicants in I.A. XV and M.F.A. No 2873/2004 is filed by the respondents in MS. C. No.5/2000.

2. The material facts leading up to this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties before the trail Court are as follows:

M/s. Gavisiddeshwara and Company, a partnership Firm was constituted by late Sri Allum Karibasappa along with Sri Agadi Lakshminarayana Setty under the partnership deed dated 28.06.1963. The said Firm was reconstituted with three more persons namely, Singamasetty Subbarayudu, P. Govindappa Setty and T.G. Sathyanarayana Setty. Sri Allum Karibasappa was the major partner of the firm and Sri Agadi Lakshminarayana Setty was the convenor of the firm. On 31.03.1974, Sri Sathyanarayana Setty retired from the firm and his share was purchased by Allum Karibasappa for a consideration of Rs. 95,000/- (book value) and the firm was reconstituted on 01.04.1974 with the other partners. Sri Singamasetty Subbarayudu died on 20.02.1975. At the time of his death, he owed large sum of money of various creditors. Singamasetty Subbarayudu had constituted a firm known as Singamasetty Venkataramaiah Setty and Son. D.L. Chetty and M/s. Provintial Vysya Education Fund (registered), Bellary, initiated insolvency proceedings against the contesting respondents before the Court of the District Judge, Bellary, in I.C. Nos. 2/75 and M/s Venkatappa Setty and Company initiated insolvency proceedings against the respondents herein in I.C. No. 3/75. The respondents 1 and 2 in M.F.A. No.2873/2004 were adjudged as insolvents on 25.05.1977 and they were having one anna share in the Firm. It was ordered to the sold and the creditors’ claim was satisfied. On 09.08.1977, the original appellant-Allum Karibasappa filed I.A. XV before the trial Court in I.C. No.2/75. The original appellant sought the receiver to accept Rs. 95,000/- and transfer the one anna share of late Singamasetty Subbarayudu in his favour and contended that there was a concluded contract prior to adjudication and that he was entitled to share. On 04.01.1983, the trial Court allowed I.A.XV and adjudging Singamasetty Bhagawath Gupta and Singamasetty Venkataramaiah and Son (respondents 1 and 2 in M.F. A No. 2873/2004) as insolvents and directed the transfer of share of Singamasetty Subbarayudu in the partnership firm of M/s. Gavisiddeshwara and Company, Bellary, in favour of the first petitioner subject to certain conditions and directed the official receiver to execute a deed of transfer of the one-anna share in favour of the original appellant. On 11.03.1983, the official receiver executed the deed of transfer in favour of the original appellant. Being aggrieved by the order of the trial Court dated 04.01.1983 on I.A.XV in I.C. No.2/75, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in M.F.A. No.2873/2004 filed M.F.A. No.1048/1983 before this Court. This Court, by order dated 10.06.1983, stayed the operation of the order dated 04.01.1986. However, subsequently, during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court in M.F.A No. 1048/1983, the learned District Judge annulled the order made by him holding that Singamasetty Bhagwath Gupta and Singamsetty Venkataramaiah as insolvents subject to the proceedings pending before this Court. The Division Bench of this Court, in M.F.A. No.1048/1983, has set aside the order passed by the learned District Judge on I.A. XV in I.C. No.2/75 dated 04.01.1983 and has remitted the matter to the learned District Judge by order dated 13.02.1997, which reads as under:

“In as much as th
















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top