Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an equitable assignee of a decree, after obtaining leave to execute under Order 21, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, can maintain an insolvency notice under Section 9(1) of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act.
Analysis: The expression "creditor" in Section 9 is of wider import and is not confined to the original decree-holder. The statutory scheme does not require that the decree or order for payment must have been passed in favour of the person issuing the insolvency notice; it is sufficient that an amount is due to that person in respect of the decree or order. Once leave is granted under Order 21, Rule 16, the assignee steps into the shoes of the decree-holder and may execute the decree to the same extent. The construction adopted is consistent with principle and with the relevant English bankruptcy law provisions relied upon as supporting context.
Conclusion: An assignee of a decree, including an equitable assignee who has obtained leave to execute, is entitled to maintain an insolvency notice under Section 9(1) of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because the respondents were competent to issue the insolvency notice as assignees of the decree-holder, and the dismissal of the challenge was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of Section 9(1) of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, the term "creditor" includes an assignee of a decree-holder who is entitled to execute the decree.