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

1923 Supreme(Cal) 256

N. R. CHATTERJEA, CUMING
Satish Chandra Addya – Appellant
Versus
Firm Raj Narain Pakhira and Rasik Lal Pakhira BR Rasi Lal Pakhira @APPELLANT – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. These two appeals arise out of proceedings under the Provincial Insolvency Act.

2. An application was made by one of the creditors for declaring the debtors (who are four out of five members of a firm, the fifth being a minor) insolvent. Some of the other creditors opposed the application on various grounds. The learned, District Judge dismissed the application on several grounds. After the application had teen disposed of, four of the debtors made an application for being declared insolvents. This also was rejected by the Court below on the ground, among others, that they had not proved their inability to pay their debts. These two appeals are against these two orders. We propose to deal first of all with Miscellaneous Appeal No. 378 of 1922 which deals with applications of the four debtors to be declared insolvents.

3. It appears that one of the debtors, Rasik Lal, was examined and he stated that the debts amounted to over Rs. 1,06,600 and that they were unable to pay their debts; and there is a report of the Receiver which states that the value of the Rice Mill would be about Rs. 30,000 only.

4. The learned District Judge, however, in arriving at the conclusion that the

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