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

1939 Supreme(Mad) 259

WADSWORTH
P. N. M. M. Muthupalaniappa Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
N. A. R. R. M. Raman Chettiar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Wadsworth, J.

1. This appeal raises the question of the right of the insolvency Court, after property sold as the property of the insolvent has been delivered to the purchaser, to entertain an application for redelivery by a person alleged to have been dispossessed when holding adversely to the insolvent. The insolvency was one of 1931 in the Court of the District Judge of Amherst, Burma. The insolvency Court sent letters of request to the District Judge of Ramnad under Section 77, Provincial Insolvency Act, seeking the aid of the official receiver of Ramnad in realizing the property of the insolvent. On 28th August 1934, the official receiver, Ramnad, held a sale. A claim was preferred by the present petitioner in the Amherst Court to the property advertised for sale. The claim was based on a sale from his sister-in-law in March 1934, the petitioner having married a daughter of the insolvent. The District Judge, Amherst, asked the District Judge, Ramnad, to investigate this claim. The claim was not pressed by the petitioner and was dismissed. The sale was subsequently confirmed and on 12th February 1936, the official receiver exeouted a sale deed in favour of the appellant.



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