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

1925 Supreme(Oudh) 178

HIGH COURT OF OUDH
Simpson, A.J.C.
Kallu - Appellant
Versus
Agha Salim - Respondent
Decided On : 16-07-1925

JUDGMENT

Simpson, A J C - This is an application under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The order objected to is one disallowing an objection by a judgment-debtor, and ordering the execution of the decree to proceed. The suit was one based on a promissory note, and it was decreed after contest. The decree-holder proceeded to execute the decree by attachment of some movable property. An objection was then put in by a third party, who is alleged to have been in fact the daughter of the judgment-debtor. That objection was dismissed. Then the present objection was taken, which is that the judgment-debtor was adjudged an insolvent as far back as July 1916. The learned Judge of the Small Cause Court disallowed the objection on the principle laid down in Fida Husain v. Collector of Shahjahanpur [1914] 17 O.C. 267. That decision was passed under the old Act. I prefer to proceed under the provisions of Section 34. That section lays down that debts, to which the debtor is subject when he is adjudged an insolvent or to which he may become subject before his discharge by reason of any obligation incurred before the date of such adjudication, shall be deemed to be debts provable under the Act. By implication this section lays down that if the debt is incurred after adjudication, it is not provable under the Act. The present debt, therefore, could not have been proved under the Act, because the promissory note was not executed till 22nd January 1923, long after the date of adjudication. The creditor is, therefore, remitted to his ordinary remedy. No doubt, as is pointed out on behalf of the applicant, a difficulty is created by the fact that the property of the insolvent vests in the Receiver or the Court. If an objection had been taken by the Receiver or the Court I should have been ready to consider it, but I am not prepared to take any action on the application of the insolvent himself, especially as he seems to be a dishonest man. The application is dismissed with costs.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top