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

1917 Supreme(All) 301

HENRY RICHARDS, P. C. BANERJI
Firm, Tohar Mal-Uttam Chand – Appellant
Versus
Suraj Bali – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of an application for execution. The facts are shortly as follows: The decree-holder appellant had a decree against the proprietor of the firm of Suraj Bali. Another creditor of Suraj Bali presented a petition for his adjudication as insolvent. The firm of the decree-holder was named as one of the creditors in the application. Sometime' later (but before any order of adjudication), Suraj Bali came forward with a proposal for a composition of 4-annas in the rupee. Notice of this application was sent to the creditors, including the decree-holder. The decree-holder took no notice and the composition proposal was accepted under the provisions of Section 27 of the Insolvency Act. The other creditors have since been paid 4 annas in the rupee. The decree-holder then presented an application to execute his decree. He was met by an objection on behalf of the judgment-debtor that the accepted proposal made in the insolvency matter barred the application for execution. The lower Appellate Court has allowed the objection. and dismissed the application for execution. The decree-holder comes here in second appeal and claims that he is not bound by the compositio

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