Delayed proofs of claim may be admitted if prior dividends remain undisturbed and funds suffice to pay proportional dividend.

Rule 91 permitting fixed times for proving debts does not bar admission of late proofs where justice requires and prior distributions are not disturbed; the court applied the statutory scheme and comparative insolvency practice to hold that delay may be excused if available assets suffice to satisfy the delayed claim proportionately without affecting earlier dividends. Operative effect: the Official Liquidator must admit the claimant's proof and pay the dividend due provided prior dividends remain undisturbed and sufficient funds exist to make a proportional payment.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delayed proof of claim of a creditor should be admitted and the delay excused under rule 91 of the Indian Company Rules.

Analysis: The Court examined rule 91 of the Indian Company Rules alongside Sections 191 and 229 of the Indian Companies Act and compared the practice under insolvency and English bankruptcy/company law (including Section 65 of the English Bankruptcy Act and Section 72 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act). The statutory scheme permits the Court to fix times for proving debts but does not foreclose excusing delays where justice can be done without disturbing earlier distributions. Authorities cited support admitting proofs after the prescribed time so long as prior dividends are not disturbed and available assets suffice to satisfy the delayed claim proportionately.

Conclusion: Delay in filing the proof of claim is excused; the Official Liquidator is directed to admit the applicant's claim and pay the dividend due if this can be done without disturbing prior dividends and if sufficient funds are available. (Decision in favour of petitioner.)

---