PUNITHAVELU MUDALIAR Vs. BHASHYAM AIYANGAR
Click here to view full judgement.
Charles Arnold White, CJ -
(1.) This is an appeal from an order of Boddam, J., dismissing an application by a judgment- creditor of an insolvent for an order that a sum of Rs. 3,400 in the hands of the Official Assignee should be paid by the Official Assignee to the judgment-creditor (the appellant).
(2.) A preliminary objection was taken by the Official Assignee that no appeal lay from the order of the learned Judge. I think the order is a "Judgment" within the meaning of article 15 of the Letters Patent and that the preliminary objection should be overruled.
(3.) The facts are these. By an instrument, dated 13 March 1897, one C. Bhashyam Aiyangar, who was afterwards adjudged an insolvent, in consideration of a sum of Rs. 5,600 found due from him 1 to the appellant on a settlement of accounts, covenanted to repay this sum to the appellant in quarterly instalments and mortgaged to the appellant his stock-in- trade and all outstandings and moneys then due and owing and thereafter to become due and payable to the mortgagor. The deed also provided that so long as the principal and interest remained unpaid the mortgagee should be permitted to inspect the books of account and other stock and effects and property of mortgagor. The mortgagor remained in possession.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.