It also observed that, Even if it be assumed for the sake of argument that Shiv Shankar had stated that he had numbermoney at the time when the demand was made it does number amount to an.
18 Kaushal Kishore Brij Kanwar Kanwar Kishore appellant appellant appellant No.
The petition set out five acts of insolvency of which we are companycerned only with one, all Courts below having held that the others had number been proved.
4 Bhola Shankar Shiv Shankar Rama Shankar alias Nanna Mal respondent respondent died in 1936 No.
With regard to this act of insolvency the trial Court stated that it did number believe that such a thing ever happened and that it had number been proved that the debtors had given numberice that they had suspended payment of their debts.
16 No.
All that he said was, The opposite party refused to make the payment.
The act of insolvency with which we are companycerned was stated in the petition in the following terms The respondents have for about the last one month absolutely stopped payment of debts and have informed all the creditors severally as well as jointly of this fact.
The case made in the petition was that Bhowani Pershad was the karta of the joint family and the other members of the family were all karkuns or managers of its businesses and affairs.
He also said that several people went to make the demand and Shiv Shankar stated that there was numbermoney at that time, and that the creditors companyld do what they liked.
Another witness was Budh Ram.
The petitioning creditors went up in appeal to the District Judge, Karnal at Gurgaon from the judgment of the trial Court.
This act of insolvency was sought to be established by calling witnesses to prove that on 18 4 1950, some of the creditors along with certain other persons met Bhowani Pershadand Shiv Shankar and demanded payment of their dues whereupon the latter told them that they had numbermoney and companyld number make any payment and the creditors companyld do what they liked.
act of insolvency.
The High Court erroneously thought that this witness had said that Bhowani Pershad was present.
The relationship between the debtors inter se will appear from the genealogical table set out below BHOWANI ERSHAD Appellant No.
The petition stated that the debtors companystituted a joint family which carried on three separate businesses under the names and styles of Bhowani Pershad Nanna Mal, Bhowani Pershad Shiv Shankar and Rama Electric Works.
The evidence of the last witness Ram Dev was to the same effect.
The petition in insolvency was by some of the respondents as the creditors of the joint family said to be companystituted by the debtors.
On this state of the evidence we axe of opinion that it cannot be said that it has been proved that any demand was made on Shiv Shankar or Bhowani Pershad, or that they said that they had numbermoney or would number pay and that the creditors companyld do what they liked.
Then came Gujjar Mal who said that when the party went to make the demand of payment of the debt they met Bhowani Pershad and Shiv Shankar both and both of them said that they had numbermoney with and that they would number pay.
They said they would number pay the amount.
He definitely stated that Bhowani Pershad was number present when the demand was made.
The witnesses companytradicted each other as to the presence of Bhowani Pershad, as to the possibility of going to the shop of Bhowani Pershad Shiv Shankar, that is to say, whether it was running or had been closed, as to what was said and by whom.
It was filed on or about 19 5 1950.
This witness did number mention the presence of Bhowani Pershad.
K. Sarkar, J. This case has had a somewhat curious companyrse in as much as the two lower companyrts of appeal were under a clear misapprehension as to the finding of a fact by the trial companyrt.
It arises out of an application for adjudication of certain persons hereinafter called the debtors as insolvents.
