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

1938 Supreme(Cal) 164

PANCKRIDGE
In Re: Section 5, Court-fees Act 7 of 1870; In Re: Official Assignee – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


ORDER

Panckridge, J. - This matter has been referred to me by the Taxing Officer as the Judge specially appointed in that behalf by the Chief Justice u/s 5, Court-fees Act, 1870. The circumstances are as follows : One Umar Shanker Chatterjee was adjudicated an insolvent by this Court under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 on 13th February 1934. The insolvent was thereafter publicly examined u/s 27, Insolvency Act, his examination being concluded on 17th February 1938. The Official Assignee of Calcutta desires to have a certified copy of the notes of the insolvent's examination for the purpose of taking steps to have a deed of settlement executed by the insolvent on 5th July 1932 set aside. The Registrar in insolvency refuses to furnish the copy except on payment by the Official Assignee of a fee of As. 5 per folio as prescribed by Rule 204 of the Rules made u/s 112 of the Act. The Official Assignee maintains that he is entitled to obtain a copy without charge u/s 115 of the Act.

2. The learned Advocate-General appears instructed by the Solicitor for the Province of Bengal and takes the objection that the reference by the Taxing Officer is incompetent. He points out that u/s

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