IQBAL AHMAD, SULAIMAN, THOM
Abdul Rahman – Appellant
Versus
Nihal Chand – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sulaiman, C.J. - This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 2,000 lent by him to the defendant on 19th February 1927, together with interest at Rs. 1-4-0 per cent per mensem. The defence inter alia was that the plaintiff was an undischarged insolvent, and was not entitled to sue. The Courts below have overruled the objection and decreed the claim. In second appeal the Division Bench before which the case came up for disposal referred the following question to a Full Bench:
Whether the plaintiff, in view of the fact that he is an undischarged insolvent, is entitled to maintain the present suit.
2. As in several rulings, the rule of law prevailing in England has been frequently invoked, it may be convenient to point out at the outset that in England some distinction has undoubtedly been drawn between property which was owned by the insolvent at the time of his adjudication and property which is acquired by him afterwards. Following certain previous rulings it was laid down in the case of Mitchel v. Kohen (1890) 25 Q.B.D. 262 which was a suit for wrongful conversion of certain machinery that as regards after acquired property,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.