Present : Bertram C. J. and Garvin A. J.     1921.

SEDRIS v. RAMANATHAN.

103-D.C.Galle,466.

Insolvency - Power of Court to annul adjudication - Application by opposing creditor for an adjournment with a view to making an application for the annulment of adjudication.

The power of the Court to annul an adjudication in bankruptcy is not limited to cases for which special provision is made in the Insolvency Ordinance. The Court has a general power to annul an adjudication in appropriate circumstances.

APPELLANT was, on an application made by him under section 20 of Ordinance No. 7 of 1853 on December 21, 1920, to have his estate adjudged insolvent and placed under sequestration, adjudged insolvent under the provisions of section 26 of the said Ordinance.

Two sittings were appointed under section 30 and estate adjudged insolvent, and all other incidental steps having been gone through, and his last examination having been proceeded with, the second sitting was declared closed, and a public sitting was appointed for the allowance of his certificate, under the provisions of section 124 of the Ordinance, for July 12,1921.

On July 8, 1921, the assignee gave notice of his intention to oppose the granting of the certificate on four grounds.

On July 12, 1921, on an oral application made by counsel for opposing creditor asking for an adjournment of the certificate meeting to enable him to prove that the assets are not enough to pay five shillings in the pound, and to take the necessary steps to have the adjudication of insolvency annulled, the District Judge, over-ruling the objections raised by counsel for appellant to an adjournment, adjourned the meeting.

The insolvent appealed.

Soertsz, for the appellant-An order of adjudication once published in the Gazette is a judgment in rem, and cannot be annulled thereafter (see sections 30,41, and 143).

The whole of our insolvency laws is to be found within the four corners of the Ordinance, and in the Ordinance there is no provision for annulment of the adjudication in the circumstances of this case.

The Ordinance provides for the Court satisfying itself of the sufficiency of the estate before the adjudication, and once the Court has satisfied itself and adjudged the estate insolvent, the Court cannot reconsider its decision. In this case the mere fact that the estate later realized less than five shillings in the pound cannot

prejudice the appellant. That may be due to various causes, and "77~ the estate may well have been worth five shillings in the pound at the date of the petition.

Keuneman for respondent.-The Court has a general power to annul an adjudication. Ex parte Spicer;[1] Ex parte Charles Louis.[2] The material before the Court was not sufficient for the Court to adjudicate upon the sufficiency of the estate, and it is now open to the Court to annul the adjudication. 5 Bal. Notes of Cases 1.

December 2, 1921. BERTRAM C.J.-

This is an appeal by an insolvent against the order of the District Judge of Galle granting an adjournment with a view to enabling an opposing creditor to make an application for the annulment of the adjudication. The learned Judge has seen fit to grant an adjournment. There is no substantial justice in the application which the opposing creditor desires to make. The petition was presented by the insolvent himself at a time when he was undergoing imprisonment as a civil debtor. He presented the petition a day after the commencement of his imprisonment, and the ground of his petition was that he would not be able to satisfy the Court that his assets would realize five shillings in the pound. Had he waited for three weeks, he would, under the final sentence of section 20 of the Insolvents Estate Ordinance, No. 7 of 1853, have been able to apply for an adjudication without satisfying the Court as to the amount of his assets. The sole object of this application is to subject the