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

1981 Supreme(Mad) 239

P.VENUGOPAL
Sakuntala Ammal – Appellant
Versus
Seetharama Reddiar – Respondent


ORDER

P. Venugopal, J.

1. The petitioner in I.A. No. 617 of 1975 filed the petition under sections 4 and 5 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, to release four items of properties from the custody of the Official Receiver on the ground that his step-mother had purchased those four items from the insolvent. The insolvent and the Official Receiver were impleaded as respondents in that petition. The insolvent remained ex parte. The Official Receiver issued notice to all the creditors and having no response from the creditors, filed a counter stating that the creditors have not taken any interest. Thereafter, three of the creditors filed I.A. No. 687 of 1975 to implead themselves as parties in I.A. No. 617 of 1975. In view of Section 28(2) of the Provincial Insolvency Act and the absence of any material to show that) the Official Receiver was not acting properly in the interest of the estate, the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the creditors for impleading themselves as parties in I.A. No. 617 of 1975. This order of the trial Court was confirmed in appeal by the lower appellate Court. Hence the present civil revisi.on petition before this Court.

2. The learned Counsel for 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