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

1950 Supreme(Bom) 122

M.C.CHAGLA
Paragouda Sanagouda and Anr – Appellant
Versus
Shyamu Pandurang Waman – Respondent


Judgment

[1] This revision application raises an interesting question as to whether a decision by the Debt Adjustment Court that the applicant is a debtor and that the total amount of his debts do not exceed Rs.16,000 is subject to appeal to the District Court.

[2] The provision with regard to appeal is to be found is Section 43 of the B.A.D.K. Act and Section 43 (1)(ii) provides that an appeal shall lie from every order passed under Section 17. The very ingenious argument advanced before me is that this provision only applies to an order passed under Section 17 (2) and not to a decision given under Section 17 (1). Section 17 (a) provides that it the Court finds that a person is not a debtor or that the total amount of his debts is more than Rs. 16,000, then the Court shall dismiss the application. Therefore, what is contended is that it is only when an order is made dismissing the debtors application that an appeal lies under Section 43. It is further pointed out that Section 20 provides for an order to be made when the Court holds that the applicant is a debtor and that his debts do not exceed rupees 15,000, and the order to be made under Section 20 is that the Court shall proceed



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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top