Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.47 seconds)
Documents citing Banakar Basappa And Anr. vs Hansji Gulabchand Firm on 17 December, 1935

The Official Trustee Of Madras As ... vs S.V.L.L. Sethu Chettiar And Ors. on 9 April, 1948

The last case cited by Mr. Krishnan was that in Banaker Basappa v. Hmsaji Gulabchand Firm (1935) 71 M.L.J. 333 : I.L.R. 59 Mad. 1049 in which Wadsworth, J., held that an alienee whose alienation was one of the transactions challenged in an insolvency had a right to maintain an application for the setting aside of an ex parte order of adjudication. The learned Judge observed incidentally that the alienee might have a right appeal as the matter came under Section 4 of the Provincial Insolvency Act.
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Official Receiver vs N.S. Kuppuswami Chettiar And Anr. on 6 May, 1937

13. Turning to the actual wording used by Section 75 itself, we cannot resist the conclusion, reading the section as a whole, that it concerns itself with orders passed under the Provincial Insolvency Act determining the rights of parties. It seems extremely unlikely that the Legislature intended to apply Section 75 to orders passed under the Civil Procedure Code which are governed with respect to appeals by Order 43, Civil P.C. Mr. Sitarama Rao for the appellant has quoted a decision of Wadsworth, J. in Basappa v Hansaji Gulabchand Firm AIR 1936 Mad 660 to support his contention that the word 'order' in Section 75 is all embracing. There the District Judge refused to set aside an ex parte order passed by him in appeal and it was argued that this was an order passed by him in appeal and so according to Section 75(1), it was final and against it no appeal lay. Wadsworth, J. very rightly, if we may say so, held that when the appeal had been dismissed for default, the appeal was at an end and that any order passed subsequently Under Order 9, Rule 13 was not an order made in appeal and that therefore an appeal was not barred by virtue of Section 75. We do not however see how this decision can in any way help us. An order passed Under Order 9, Rule 13 is appealable under Order 43, Civil P.C. If the District Judge in that case had passed an order setting aside the ex parte decree, would it have been open to the other side to contend that although no appeal is provided for by the Civil Procedure Code against an order passed Under Order 9, Rule 13 setting aside an ex parte decree, an appeal would nevertheless lie Under Section 75, Provincial Insolvency Act?
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1