Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (3.06 seconds)Section 2 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 [Entire Act]
Section 46 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 [Entire Act]
Section 21 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 [Entire Act]
Section 9 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 [Entire Act]
Yenumula Mallu Dora vs Peruri Seetharatnam And Others on 14 October, 1965
22. If the Appellant's interpretation is to be accepted, an Insolvent will be
in position to settle the debts of only certain creditors and seek annulment whereas
other creditors will remain outstanding. Such interpretation will be contrary to the
law laid down by the Supreme Court in Yenumula Maluoora Vs. Peruri Seetharathnam
& Ors. (supra) wherein it was held that settlement of only some creditors is not
permissible as the Insolvency Act is available for the benefit of all creditors.
Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909
Section 10 in The Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 [Entire Act]
The Recovery Of Debts Due To Banks And Financial Institutions Act, 1993
Mandvi Co-Operative Bank Ltd. And ... vs Anant V. Hegade on 17 October, 2006
Section 13(2) postulates that at the
hearing of the Petition, the Court shall require proof of the debt of the
Petitioning Creditor and of the act of insolvency or if more than one
act of insolvency is alleged in the petition, some one of the alleged acts
of insolvency. Apart from the claim of the Petitioning Creditor which
is crystallised in an adjudication by the Co operative Court, the claim
ssp 19/27
APP 583 OF 2019.doc
of the substituted Petitioning Creditor has also been crystallised in an
arbitral award." It has, therefore, been held in the above judgment
that a substituted petitioning creditor is required to meet the
definition of the expression 'creditor' as contained in section 2(a) of
the said Act. Apart from being bound by, I am in respectful agreement
with the judgment in Mandvi Co-operative Bank Limited vs. Anant
Hegade. I would only add a few words in support of this view."