The expression "able to pay his debts" in Section 25 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920, is to be used in the normal commercial sense and the debtor must satisfy the court that he has the ability to discharge all his debts presently, not just the debts of the petitioning creditor.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition has been headed as under S. 115 of the Civil P. C. but it is really under S. 75 of the Provincial Insolvency Act 5, 1920, (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), against the appellate order of Mr. M. K. Chawla, Additional District Judge, dated 5th Oct. 1972. by which he has dismissed the (Against order of M. K. Chawla, Additional Dist. J. , Delhi, D/- 5-10-1972.) appeal and affirmed the order of the Insolvency Judge, dated 10th February, 1972, refusing to dismiss the insolvency petition filed by the creditors, respondents 1 and 2, against the petitioners.

( 2 ) THE material facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The creditors, who are contesting respondents before me, deposited some amounts with the petitioners, the details of which it is not necessary to state at this stage. They had received part of the payment, but had not received the balance in spite of repeated demands. The respondents filed an application under S. 9 of the Act for adjudication of the petitioners as insolvent and claiming that the petitioners before me had committed various acts of insolvency mentioned in the petition. They also alleged that the petitioners owed a sum of Rs. 12 lakhs to the various creditors. Upon the issue of the notice of the same the petitioners filed a written statement contesting the material allegations and raising various disputes. Eventually, the petitioners deposited the amount claimed by the respondents in court and they filed an application under S. 25 of the Act alleging that they were not insolvent and had means to pay the debts and so the insolvency petition be dismissed. In the meantime, another firm by name Jamna Dass Balkishan Dass (which is not represented before me) filed a petition for adjudication of the petitioners as insolvents and they claimed that a sum of Rs. 5,000 was due to them and the petitioners had committed various acts of insolvency and that their petition be consolidated with the petition giving rise to this revision. The petitioners have disputed the claim of the aforesaid second petitioning creditor and the same is still to be investigated.

( 3 ) THE insolvency Court held that the respondents 1 and 2 had alleged that the petitioners owed debts to the tune of Rs. 12 lakhs to the various creditors and that the second petitioning creditors claim was yet to be investigated, so it may be safely contended that the debt due to the first petitioning creditors had been or could be deemed to be satisfied, but it had not been established that the petitioners were able to pay their debts. As a result the insolvency petition could not be dismissed. The court consequently dismissed the petition of the petitioners filed under S. 25 of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners filed an appeal before the District Court and the Additional District Judge affirmed the findings of the Insolvency Judge and dismissed the appeal.

( 4 ) FOR purposes of this appeal, it may be assumed that debt due to the first petitioning creditors has been discharged, while the liability to pay the debt of the second petitioning creditor is disputed. Under these circumstances, the question that arises for determination is whether the expression "able to pay his debts" includes the debts other than those of the petitioning creditor.

( 5 ) UNDER the Act, a creditor is entitled to present an insolvency petition if he fulfils the conditions laid down in S. 9 of the Act besides particulars prescribed by sub-s. (2) of S. 1. 3 of the Act. Section 14 prohibits the withdrawal of an insolvency petition without the leave of the court. Section 15 provides for consolidation of two or more insolvency petitions. Section 16 prescribes that if a petitioner does not proceed with the insolvency petition with due diligence, the court may substitute as petitioner any other creditor to whom the debtor may be indebted in the amount not less than required by the Act in the case of a petition by a creditor. Section 17 pr