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

1929 Supreme(Rang) 36

Pandit Bindraban Dinanath – Appellant
Versus
Official Receiver To C T A R A Firm – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. These are two appeals; arising out of insolvency proceedings in. the course of which by an order dated 22nd June 1927, the C.T.A.R.A. Chettyar Firm were adjudicated insolvent by the District Court of Mandalay at the instance of one Judhishtir Day. The insolvency was a very large one and the proceedings are far from being completed. A number of important transfers by the firm have already been set aside as fraudulent and there are others, investigations as to the character of which are still pending. There are also a number of other substantial matters remaining to be dealt with.

2. By the order of adjudication the insolvent firm was ordered to apply for discharge on or before 22nd June 1928. On that date the case was called on but there was no appearance; and owing to the illness of the Judge who was unable to attend the Court that day an order was passed and subsequently signed as "seen" by the Judge, directing that the matter should be put up again on 25th June 1928. The matter was in fact dealt with on 26th June 1928. From the diary of that date it is clear that there was again no appearance, and as the learned Judge was of the opinion that the firm could not get a dis

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