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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 193

PANDRANG ROW
S. P. P. L. Palaniappa Chettiar, through his authorised agent Ramanathan Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
The Official Reciever of Madura – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pandrang Row, J.

1. This petition arises out of an application by the Official Receiver of Madura under Section 54 of the Provincial Insolvency Act to declare as void a certain hypothecation bond dated 21st July, 1931, in favour of the respondent and to annul the same.

2. The bond was executed by the insolvent in I.P. No. 48 of 1931 and also on behalf of his minor sons. On the merits it was found by both the Courts below that the alienation was a fraudulent preference and it was accordingly annulled. In this petition no attempt has been made to question the correctness of the concurrent findings to this effect by the two Courts below, and the only point urged is that the transfer can be set aside or annulled only as regards the insolvents own share in the family properties which were mortgaged and that it cannot be set aside or annulled in respect of the minors shares in the properties, because it is only the transfer of the insolvents property that can be set aside under Section 54 of the Act. Reliance is placed in support of this contention on the decision of Sundaram Chettiar, J., reported in Subramanian Chettiar v. Subbaraya Goundan AIR1935Mad246 . No other decision on th

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