Posted On by &filed under High Court, Madras High Court.

Madras High Court
Alagappa Chetti vs Sabathambal And Ors. on 23 January, 1902
Equivalent citations: (1902) ILR 25 Mad 724
Author: Moore
Bench: Moore


Moore, J.

1. The order of the District Judge cannot be upheld, The petitioner was arrested on the 22nd January 1899 but was released under Section 336, Civil Procedure Code, on his furnishing security that he would within one month apply to be declared an insolvent. For reasons that need not be considered he did not apply to a court having jurisdiction till the 6th May 1899 when ha made the present application to the District Munsif of Madura, who rejected it as out of time. On appeal, his order was confirmed by the District Judge. It does not appear that there is any question as to a bar by limitation in a case of this sort. As the petitioner did not put in his application to be declared an insolvent within the prescribed time he was liable to be committed to jail and if this had been done he would certainly have had to put in a fresh application under the third clause of paragraph (b) of the proviso to Section 336, Civil Procedure Code. He was not, however, so arrested and it is therefore still open to him to apply under Section 344, Civil Procedure Code, to be declared an insolvent on the strength of the permission given to him to do so on the 23rd January 1899.

2. This appeal is allowed, the order of the District Judge is set aside with costs and the appeal is sent back to him for decision of the other points raised.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.224 seconds.