- (1.) THIS is a revision against the order of the 1st Additional District Judge Unnao dismissing his appeal against the order of the Insolvency Judge rejecting his application for being adjudged an insolvent.
(2.) RELEVANT facts are that the applicant filed a petition under S. 10/13 of the Provincial Insolvency Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for being adjudged an insolvent. His allegations were that he was indebted to the extent of Rs. 11,900/-which comprised of the following four (sic) (five ?) debts:- 1. U. P. State through Deputy Commissioner (i) District Industries Officer for starting an industry......Rs. 4000/- (ii) District Live Stock Officer, Unnao for starting poultry farm ...Rs. 500/- Both the debts were secured by a mortgage of a house. 2. Unsecured loans: (i) Smt. Zahra Begum, wife of the applicant-dower debt......Rs. 5000/- (ii) Siddiq Ahmad on pronote dated January, 1965 ...... Rs. 2000/- (iii) Sales tax Department...... Rs. 400/- He further alleged that he was not in a position to pay debts from his assets, his income was also quite low. The opposite parties filed objections. Their contention was that the applicant had sufficient means to pay and he had not disclosed his entire property. The learned Insolvency Judge held that dower debt had not become due as there was no judicial separation and the wife was still living. He also held that the debt showndue toSiddiq Ahmad was also not due because it was a time-barred debt.
(3.) AS regards the other debts to the State Government he held that the house on the security of which loans were taken was shown worth Rs. 7500/- at the time of the mortgage in 1964 and so the present value must have increased. This according to him was about Rs.20,000/-. Thus, he held that his liability did not exceed his assets end so he dismissed the petition. In appeal before the learned District Judge the point argued was about the secured debts alone. The learned District Judge held that in view of S. 47 of the Insolvency Act, proceedings in respect of secured debts were not entertainable. Accordingly he dismissed the same.;