Mobile View
Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 3 docs
Section 31 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920
Section 23 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920
The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920
Citedby 1 docs
Vathapa Gounder And Ors. vs Thambayi Ammal And Ors. on 31 August, 1987

User Queries
Madras High Court
Sinnaswami Chettiar vs Aligi Goundan And Ors. on 3 April, 1924
Equivalent citations: (1924) 47 MLJ 530

JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal from the order of the District Judge of Coimbatore refusing protection to the appellant who has filed a petition in insolvency in that Court. The petition had been admitted but no order of adjudication had been made at the time the application for protection was made or even now. The learned Judge has refused protection on the ground that the insolvent had made two fraudulent transfers just before he made the application. We do not however propose to go into that question in appeal. Section 31 of the Provincial Insolvency Act deals with applications for protection only after the order of adjudication is made and that stage had not been reached in this case yet. The only other provision which deals expressly with what may be called protection before adjudication is Section 23. That section says, " At the time of making an order admitting the petition or at any subsequent time before adjudication, the Court may, if the debtor is under arrest or imprisonment in execution of a decree of any Court for the payment of money, order his release on such terms as to security as may be reasonable and necessary." The condition under which the Provincial Insolvency Act allows the Court to interfere between an insolvent and his judgment-creditors before adjudication is where a decree-holder has arrested him. An insolvent is not entitled to make an application under the Act for protection before he is adjudicated, unless he has been arrested, because there is really no necessity till then for any protection. If the insolvent wants to apply for protection, he ought to expedite matters in such a way as to get his order of adjudication first and then ask the Court to grant protection under Section 31. Neither the state of affairs contemplated by Section 31 nor by Section 23 has arisen in this case. We, therefore, think that there is no necessity to grant protection at this stage. If the insolvent is arrested hereafter, it will be open to him to apply under Section 23 and we have no doubt that the Court will consider his case on the merits and not allow the order now passed by the District Judge to stand in the way of such consideration. Similarly if he gets an order of adjudication, he may apply under Section 31. But at this stage we do not think it is necessary to interfere. The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.