- (1.) NEITHER the insolvent nor the creditor at whose behest the insolvency proceedings were launched are represented even at the second call. Affidavits have been used both by the insolvent and the creditor at whose behest the debtor was declared insolvent.
(2.) THE order declaring the debtor insolvent was made on June 13, 1995 and after recording the submissions made on behalf of the parties, the following finds mention in the order :- "having considered the submission made by Mr. Utpal Bose, the learned Counsel appearing for the creditor and after going through the petition and relevant sections of the Provincial Insolvency Act, I hold that the creditor has made out his case and the debtor Mr. Arvind Agarwal is to be adjudicated as an insolvent. Therefore upon considering the Insolvency Petition and after hearing the learned counsels, it is ordered that the debtor Arvind Agarwal of 42a, C. R. Avenue, Calcutta be and is hereby adjudged an insolvent. It is further ordered that the debtor should apply for his discharge as and when he is in a position to liquidate the debt of the creditor herein. "
(3.) THE present applicant is a decree holder. The present applicant says that the acts of insolvency enumerated in Sectioni 9 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 requires to be adjudicated upon by court and the Court's satisfaction has to be recorded before the declaration of a debtor as insolvent.;