NARAYANA SHENOI Vs. OFFICIAL RECEIVER ALLEPPEY
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
OFFICIAL RECEIVER, ALLEPPEY
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) In this revision Mr. N. Venkitarama Iyer, learned counsel for the 2nd insolvent who is the petitioner, challenges the order of the learned District Judge, Alleppey holding that the decree holder respondent is entitled to the interest provided for under S.64(6) of the Travancore - Cochin Insolvency Act, 1955, T.C. Act II of 1956, which may have to be referred to as the Act.
(2.) It may be stated that the T.C. Insolvency Act, 1955 was amended by the Travancore - Cochin Insolvency (Amendment) Act, 1957 - Kerala Act 18 of 1957 after the formation of the Kerala State. By S.2 of the amending Act the words "Travancore - Cochin" occurring in the parent Act - Act 11/1956 has been omitted and there is a further provision that the said Act will apply to the whole State of Kerala. Therefore, the Act with which we are now concerned namely, Insolvency Act of 1955 - T. C., Act II of 1956 applies to the entire State of Kerala.
(3.) The defence that was taken by the insolvents to the claim made by the decree holder under S.64(6) of the Act was that provision will apply only when there is either by contract or agreement or by a decree of court provision made for payment of future interest. In this case, according to the debtors the right of the decree holder to get interest has been limited to a particular period namely from 1105 Makaram till the date of the High Court judgment and future interest also has been limited by the specific terms of the decree passed by the Travancore High Court, namely either a period of 3 years or the recovery of the amount whichever occurs earlier. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the contention was that inasmuch as in this case there is no recurring right recognised in the decree holder to claim future interest for ever S.64(6) of the Act cannot be invoked.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.