TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the appeal could be prosecuted after the appellants were adjudicated insolvent and the Official Assignee was unable to furnish security for costs; (ii) whether money deposited in court under a consent order for stay of execution formed property of the insolvents within Section 52(2)(a) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909.
Issue (i): Whether the appeal could be prosecuted after the appellants were adjudicated insolvent and the Official Assignee was unable to furnish security for costs.
Analysis: The Official Assignee stated that he was neither in a position to furnish security nor to prosecute the appeal. In those circumstances, the appeal could not proceed.
Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Issue (ii): Whether money deposited in court under a consent order for stay of execution formed property of the insolvents within Section 52(2)(a) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909.
Analysis: The deposit was made only as security to preserve the respondents' decree pending appeal. The money remained impressed with the condition that it would go to the party ultimately entitled on the result of the appeal, and therefore did not constitute property of the insolvents available for distribution among creditors.
Conclusion: The deposited sum did not vest in the Official Assignee as part of the insolvent estate and was payable to the respondents' attorneys with accrued interest.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the respondents were entitled to receive the money deposited in court in partial satisfaction of their decree, the amount not forming part of the insolvent estate.
Ratio Decidendi: Money deposited in court under an order for stay of execution is held as security for the party eventually found entitled to the decree and does not become part of the judgment-debtor's insolvent estate merely because insolvency intervenes before the appeal is concluded.
TaxTMI 
