Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 32 (0.58 seconds)
State Of Punjab vs Okara Grain Buyers Syndicate Ltd.And ... on 15 November, 1963 cites

Province Of Bombay vs Municipal Corporation Of Bombay on 10 October, 1946

No doubt, s. 13 is concerned with claims by displaced creditors against debtors who are not displaced persons as contrasted with s. 10 under which claims may be made against debtors who are displaced persons. But this cannot make any difference. It is not possible by any principle of construction to hold that the debt due by the State to a displaced debtor is within the Act for the purpose of ascertaining the paying capacity of the debtor notwithstanding the definition of "debt" in s. 2(6)(c) but that the State is not within the scope of s. 13 for the purpose of the same liability being ascertained. This is so because for the very purpose of determining paying capacity under s. 32 the genuineness and the quantum of the alleged debt due by the State is the subject of enquiry and adjudication by the identical tribunal which would be conducting the enquiry and make the decision if the claim were made under s. 13. Adopting, therefore, the very principle for which the learned Advocate-General contends we consider that the test formulated by Lord du Parcq in Province of Bombay v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Bombay"' :
Bombay High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 37 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next