The revision petitioner is the third respondent in I.PNo.5 of 1984 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode and the third respondent in C.M.A.No.37 of 1990 on the file of the District Judge, Erode. The first respondent is the petitioning creditor before the Insolvency Court and the appellant before the lower appellate court. The second and third respondents herein are the respondents 1 and 2 before the Insolvency Court and respondents 1 and 2 before the lower appellate court. In this order, the parties to this revision will hereinafter be referred to as the petitioning creditor and the respondents respectively as they were described before the Insolvency Court. The petitioning creditor filed I.P.No.5 of 1984 to adjudicate the first respondent before the Insolvency Court. That was dismissed on merits. On appeal by the petitioning creditor, the order of the Insolvency Court was set aside and thus the first respondent came to be adjudicated as an insolvent. Hence, the present revision before this Court at the instance of the third respondent.

.2. I heard Mr.V.Narayanaswami, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and though the contesting firs