Thomson J:

-

This is an application to set aside a Bankruptcy Notice which was issued on two unsatisfied orders for maintenance made by the Chief Kathi for Perak.The only question that arises is whether a bankruptcy notice can be founded on such an order.

That question is to be decided on a construction of s. 4(i)(i) Of the Bankruptcy Enactment and s. 66 of Ch 2 of the Laws of the Federated Malay States which is the only existing provision for the enforcement of orders made by Kathis' Courts and which reads as follows :-

"66 - In the event of any lawful order made by a Court of a Kathi . . . not being obeyed, such Court may report the matter, with a copy of all proceedings therein, to a Court of a Magistrate of the First Class within the same district and thereupon it shall be the duty of such last-mentioned Court either to enforce such order an though it were an order made by itself or to send it to another Court for execution."

In my opinion the point can be most satisfactorily disposed of by reference to certain observations by Fletcher Moulton LJ, in the case of Re a Bankruptcy Notice [1907] 1 KB 482.The question in issue in that case was whether a Bankruptcy Notice could be founded on an arbitration award.His Lordship was of the opinion that it could not and in the course of his judgment to that effect he said:

The powers of the Court as to giving effect to such an award in such an arbitration are defined by s. 12 of the Arbitration Act, 1889.That section provides that "an award on a submission may by leave of the Court or a Judge be enforced in the same manner as a judgment or order to the same effect." But it gives no

power to turn such an award into a judgment.It gives to the award the same status as a judgement for the purpose of enforcement, but it leaves it what it was before, viz., an award .......... The only other question is as to whether the procedure under s. 4 sub-section 1(g), of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, is an enforcement within the meaning of s. 12 of the Arbitration Act, 1889.In my judgment an application for a bankruptcy notice is not a method of enforcing a judgment.It is the commencement of proceedings of far wider effect, and is not intended to be included in the words of s. 12 of the Arbitration Act.

So far as the question before me here is concerned, I can see no material difference either between s. 12 of the Arbitration Act and s. 66 of Ch 2, or between s. 4(i)(g) of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, and s. 4(i)(i) of the local Bankruptcy Enactment.By parity of reasoning with the passage which has been quoted, I am compelled to the conclusion that s. 66 gives the Kathi's Court order the status of a Magistrate's Court for the purpose of enforcement but it leaves it what it was before, that is a Kathi's Court order, and that procedure under s. 4(i)(i) of the Bankruptcy Enactment is not an enforcement under s. 66.

The application is accordingly allowed and the bankruptcy notice to which it relates set aside.

Notice set aside.